*Warning, blog contains NSFW Link
The relationship between the audience and the blogger has a unique power-dynamic to it. Bloggers depend on their audience to spread their ideas/work, while the audience relies on the blogger to produce content. Unlike most models of producer-consumer content the audience has easy access to direct communication with the producer. However, this dialogue can be problematic for a blogger looking to promote ideology and discussion. If the blogger does not take an active role in managing the dialogue they attempt instigate, discussions can be unfruitful and aggressive. Bloggers that seek to create communication and dialogue, but do not impose a standard upon the discussion; often find themselves starting dialogues that they are unable to manage that can become unproductive. In this blog post I have analyzed two pro-feminist blogs: Bitch Magazine and Shakesville. While Bitch Magazine does not establish a clear impetus to have particularly civil discourse, Shakesville enforces a policy on commenters/contributors, involving required reading, which is enforced by the blogger. By creating a standard for the blog and enforcing it, ShakesVille’s not only had more developed discussions, but also significantly more involved conversations. By comparing the content and the comments/discussions on these two blogs, I will attempt to codify the strategizes that these blogs used that were successful and unsuccessful.
http://bitchmagazine.org
Blog's Construction/Foundation for Generating Civil Discourse:
In the “About” section of the website, the blog identifies itself as a pro-feminist blog with a goal: "Bitch Media’s mission is to provide and encourage an engaged, thoughtful feminist response to mainstream media and popular culture...". It makes its goal clear to promote a feminist perspective by responding to popular culture. Though the blog makes its goal quite clearly, there is no mention about engaging with the audience. On a foundational level, I do not consider this a good model for creating dialogue. The expectation that this blog communicates is an assuredness that its content is unquestionable in its veracity and therefore only requires its audience to engage with material in agreement. Interestingly, the about section addresses criticism about the name of the magazine. Conceding that some find the word “bitch” distasteful, the blog nevertheless states:
“We know that not everyone's down with the term. Believe us, we've heard all about it. But we stand firm in our belief that if we choose to reappropriate the word, it loses its power to hurt us. And if we can get people thinking about what they're saying when they use the word, that's even better.”
The stance of the blog is clearly firm and unyielding, which I think is perfectly admirable. However, despite the respect I have for an upfront honesty and unwillingness to compromise a moral opinion, to be colloquial: "Them's is fightin' words". This is not a blog looking to change dissenting opinions or promote its ideology outside of its own community. This blog is about aggressively promoting its conception of feminism and expects its audience to be immediately on board.
Content:
The first article I was exposed to was provocative, to say the least: http://bitchmagazine.org/post/oh-joy-sex-toy-how-to-eat-pussy [NSFW]. After reading several articles from the actual website, I came to the conclusion that the content of the blog was extremely polarized. The language and tone of the posts were strong and uncompromising, which I don't feel encourages discussion beyond redundant agreement or disapproval. Between the polarized nature of the posts and the uncompromising opinions on which they are based, leave little room for discussion. Reactions to the posts tended to consist of "I agree." or "But wait, one little criticism/confusion".
Comments:
Obviously some comments were highly supportive but lead to conversation that hovered between uncomfortable and thrilled.
http://bitchmagazine.org/post/whats-missing-from-journalists-tactic-of-snagging-stories-from-twitter-respect. On this post there was no discussion except for a few commenters who agreed with the post and a single complaint about a lack of trigger warning.
http://bitchmagazine.org/post/books-behind-bars-the-literary-world-of-orange-is-the-new-black. Like the previous article there was little commenting and even less conversation. Only a single and extremely short dialogue occurred, though it it was civil.
http://bitchmagazine.org/post/what-happened-on-“the-mindy-project”-this-week-was-not-okay. This post had 33 comments; the vast majorities were not in relation or response to others, and therefore not particularly engaged discussion. Some people agreed with the content of the post. Some simply talked about how they enjoyed the shows the article was talking about. A few uninformed opinions entered and were immediately shot down with information (factual information, but still, shot down).
As a whole, though the blog is well maintained and offers many resources, the blog does not foster an supportive environment for constructive dialogue. I attribute these to the following qualities:
- Unyielding / Aggressive Stance
- Polarized Nature of the Content
- Unstructured approach to comments/responses
If you have read my previous blog post “Anti-Feminist Blog Rhetoric: A What NOT To Do Guide. Also a Small List of Suggestions for Constructive Blogging.” You will notice overlap. Despite the radically opposed nature of the blogs, there are similarities in tone and polarized content. I would now like to offer a blog I consider an extremely strong model to follow.
http://www.shakesville.com
Blog's Construction/Foundation for Generating Civil Discourse:
A clear instruction is presented that in order to participate in conversation on the blog:
“Welcome to Shakesville, a progressive feminist blog about politics, culture, social justice, cute things, and all that is in between. Please note that the commenting policy and the Feminism 101 section, conveniently linked at the top of the page, are required reading before commenting.”
The blog imposes a standard upon its commenters, something we rarely see bloggers demand of their audience. Contribution requires both civility and a relatively brief introduction/education about the content. This is a phenomenal strategy. The blogger immediately establishes both a constructive/civil environment while encouraging participation. Though the blogger’s conception of “civil and constructive” may be biased, she [Melissa McEwan] irrefutably creates a standard the community is expected to follow. When conversations occur within the context of a person's blog, they fall under the domain of the blogger. While I feel that everyone’s right to free speech should not be compromised, I think a blogger has every right to create and enforce policy about the content they wish to host on their blog, including its audience’s comments.
Content:
The content is well structured. Like Bitch Magazine, there are lots of sources and links to further articles and readings. The content maintains a civil, but serious tone. Importantly, the content includes material addressing problems in the spreading of feminist ideology to groups traditionally not included, as well a promoting a unified LGBT community.
http://www.shakesville.com/2006/11/maybe-one-day.html [Including men in the discussion about dealing with rape]
http://www.shakesville.com/2007/10/fierce.html [LGBT acting as united community]
Some content is more aggressive/inflammatory but is in tune with the blog's general tone.
http://www.shakesville.com/2008/04/important-announcement.html [If you're not a feminist, you're not progressive]
However, this more aggressive content is not advertised/made available in the same way as the more inviting material. Getting to this content anticipates both heavy interaction/investment in the topic. I don't feel that a plethora of these kinds of posts would be a good strategy for getting more people engaged, but it is handled in the most efficient way.
Comments:
To make a clear point about avoiding highly polarized content I would like to address the comments on the following post:
http://www.shakesville.com/2008/04/important-announcement.html [If you're not a feminist, you're not progressive]
The post used highly polarized content against an idea and made an aggressive claim about an ideological perspective being opposed to its cause. Predictably the comments that followed were not only aggressive, but also argumentative. Little dialogue occurred, though some was positive. I think it is perfectly valid to have strong and uncompromising feelings about issues, but if you are looking to promote an idea/belief, avoid this situation.
http://www.shakesville.com/2011/08/observation_19.html
In this post, the blogger actively addressed someone who did not follow her guidelines. The conversation was considerably more civilized/educational than the content on Bitch Magazine. More people discussed the role of the content in shaping opinions and real world applications and examples.
http://www.shakesville.com/2011/07/feminism-101-helpful-hints-for-dudes.html
The discussion was both highly positive and engaged!
http://www.shakesville.com/2011/06/on-policing-femininity-and-right-to-be.html
Also highly positive, commenters actively engaged with the material in constructive ways. Coincidence? I think not.
In summation: the blogger has authority over their blog. I say, don’t waste that privelage, use it to your advantage!
Updated List of Effective Blogging Strategies:
- Have a clear goal/point to your blogging. If you are interested in promoting something, define it. If you are criticizing something, specify.
- Keep the tone constructive. If you expect an audience to engage with your material, you need to help them feel included. Aggressive rhetoric and language will only alienate possible new members. Keep aggression minimal and criticism constructive, it will only help your goal.
- If someone disagrees with you, be willing to engage them in a constructive manner. Dialogue is necessary for any debate. If you refuse to engage with people who do not share your views, your audience will become myopic and you will be unlikely to encourage growth outside of the established community.
- Create parameters/standard if and when possible for dialogue. If you are in charge of a blog, you have the ability to control the dialogue. Use this to keep things productive.
- Avoid attacks against dissenters or naysayers. It almost invariably results in combinative discussion and argument. If unavoidable, keep the criticism constructive and use it for the purpose of improving your own work, not to discredit opponents.
- The tone of your content will dictate the tone of the response. When trying to persuade others, keep the tone inviting and open. If you enter a conversation with an unyielding mindset, you are unlikely to attract people who will challenge/expand your beliefs. You will most likely only attract similarly minded people, which can easily become, in the words of the Reddit community “a circle jerk”.