Once the shouting begins, the tenor of the debate is pretty much the same, even if print editors have some moderating influence.

But the difference between traditional media and the blogosphere is that, for the most part, blogs *begin* with opinion, much of it unsubstantiated. A newspaper or a reputable online news site at least tries to deliver cornerstone content that is reasonably balanced, accurate, and fair. (We can comfortably exclude FOX News and most talk radio from that observation.) The majority of blogs have no such reference point.

It may seem like a stretch to think of conferences as the place to find a base of knowledge or evidence to give greater substance to the “op ed” content in blogs. But there's an interesting connection to be made here: Just as many blogs are crying out for a bit more substance, the world of meetings and events is looking to the interactive Web as a place to extend the discussion far beyond the closing plenary of a live event.

In sharp contrast to mass media, a point in common between blogs and conferences is that they both lend themselves to narrowcasting: you'll find conference sessions on the most arcane topics, and they're often the most interesting and transformative, even if there are only a couple of dozen people in the room.

On balance, I think there's more good than harm in the unwritten rule (that you've now written down, now that I think of it…) that site owners don't tamper with bloggers' opinions. But there's value to expert knowledge, too, and the online world loses out when we fail to include it, or forget how distinguish between well-researched fact and well-articulated opinion. Conference content may well be one of the ways to fill that gap.

Well… since the conversation is going that way…

I’ve always felt that blogging is a form of op-ed in the same way that print publications will frequently include op-ed pieces in them. I suspect they do so since that form of journalism is the one most likely to elicit a response and engage the readership. In fact, many people argue that certain print publications expose their political leanings in the type of regular reporting in which they engage.

In my view, the difference between print publication op-ed and social media op-ed is the quality of the writing. Most bloggers will publish stream of conscious works. It’s easy to paint all bloggers with the same brush and say that the quality of the writing is substandard. However, I’ve read the work of many bloggers and the quality of the people I follow rivals if not exceeds some journalists, many of whom are bound by their editors to write to appeal to a grade 6 level of interest and comprehension. So, in fairness to the journalists, they are required to oversimplify their writing.

What I’m writing here is beginning to sound like a them vs. us discussion. I didn’t expect to go that route and this is one of the dangers of blogging. I probably won’t take the time to review what I’m writing here for grammar and spelling mistakes and effective writing. A journalist will write, refine, tweak and then have their piece reviewed and commented on by an editor. Notice that this is part of the process for which they are paid. Bloggers are people that have been given a digital notebook to record their thoughts and are taking advantage of the opportunity and the motivation of an audience to document their thoughts and opinions.

The question becomes, how can both print publications and bloggers modify their respective approaches to better manage the digital conversation?

Look at the statistics of late, (I am tempted here to say 76.7% of statistics are made up. In fact, I just made that statistic up), but people are finding their information from the people they trust. Whether that be the local paper, the regional news, the national magazine, or their international social media friend. Frankly, this is not too complicated it is all story telling. Tell your story to the best of your ability and as honestly and authentically as you can and people will listen. Failure to be honest and you will be found out, the result is you will never be trusted by those people again. Treat people well, do your job of gathering information before you spew your opinion and you just may find an audience. Good luck.

Once the shouting begins, the tenor of the debate is pretty much the same, even if print editors have some moderating influence.

But the difference between traditional media and the blogosphere is that, for the most part, blogs *begin* with opinion, much of it unsubstantiated. A newspaper or a reputable online news site at least tries to deliver cornerstone content that is reasonably balanced, accurate, and fair. (We can comfortably exclude FOX News and most talk radio from that observation.) The majority of blogs have no such reference point.

It may seem like a stretch to think of conferences as the place to find a base of knowledge or evidence to give greater substance to the “op ed” content in blogs. But there’s an interesting connection to be made here: Just as many blogs are crying out for a bit more substance, the world of meetings and events is looking to the interactive Web as a place to extend the discussion far beyond the closing plenary of a live event.

In sharp contrast to mass media, a point in common between blogs and conferences is that they both lend themselves to narrowcasting: you’ll find conference sessions on the most arcane topics, and they’re often the most interesting and transformative, even if there are only a couple of dozen people in the room.

On balance, I think there’s more good than harm in the unwritten rule (that you’ve now written down, now that I think of it…) that site owners don’t tamper with bloggers’ opinions. But there’s value to expert knowledge, too, and the online world loses out when we fail to include it, or forget how distinguish between well-researched fact and well-articulated opinion. Conference content may well be one of the ways to fill that gap.

Thanks Mark for pointing this out for us. The best practice is to imagine you are speaking with someone right in front of you. Use your inside voice, as we tell our children. Don’t use profanity, explain so you can be understood, your opinion only counts if we can hear what you are saying.