Using the Moniker “Blogger”: A Case Study

Reversing the pattern of most reasoned arguments, I’ll give you all the punch line first: I’ve decided to abandon completely the use of the terms “blogger” and “blog” to the extent it is possible. This comes after a not-so-scientific study done while wandering around the Pulse show a few weeks ago in New York. Here’s a summary of the data collected.

In scenario one, I entered a booth, with my notebook and pen out, ready to take notes on the photography being shown. When asked by the booth staff what I was doing, I told them I was a photography collector. At this point, body language became welcoming, and smiles were exchanged. Polite offers to answer any questions I might have were put forth and some fawning occurred in several booths. Everyone was happy to have me take any pictures I might want to take. Many guestbooks were pointed out. One kind woman gave me the best excuse of all for my notebook (unprompted): I was “taking notes for my friends who couldn’t come to the show”.

In scenario two, I entered a booth, again with my notebook and pen out, ready to take notes on the photography being shown. When asked by the booth staff what I was doing, this time I answered that I was taking notes for my blog. At this point, body language universally became closed (arms crossed and frowning) and I could watch as the thoughts passed through their heads: “oh no, how do I get rid of this jackass from the Internet who is going to waste my time?” Mostly I was ignored from this point forward, and any questions I had were answered only grudgingly (and many didn’t at all like the idea of me taking pictures). Most looked relieved when I left.

I used both approaches enough times to prove (at least to myself) that there was some statistical significance to the differences I encountered. I do realize that term “collector” has a direct path to a sale while “blogger” does not, which is a meaningful difference in the two labels for a gallery owner. But I still wonder, what is it about the term “blogger” that seems to connote “unbalanced stalker”? Why can’t it mean highly professional journalist or critic, clearly worth respecting and reading? I’ve also found (less scientifically I’ll admit) that most people are happier when I call this destination a “site” rather than a “blog”. “Blog” seems to carry with it (for the broad population at least) an underlying sense that what will be found are the unhinged and useless rantings of a fool. “Site” as a piece of terminology seems to be an empty vessel, neither particularly positive or negative, but at least descriptive of the location where the writing is found and generally acceptable to all.

So while many of my fellow writers out there might take offense at these comments, try the test yourself on some random folks and see how they respond to the word “blogger”. My guess is that it won’t be pretty, unless they’re bloggers too. So from now on, and until the word “blogger” changes its stripes and has a positive connotation for hard hitting, useful journalism and commentary, please tell your friends about this “site” and I’ll either stick with being a "collector" or humbly call myself a “writer”.

UPDATE: Based on some of the insightful comments I've received via email and those below, I have some further ideas kicking around in my head surrounding the suitability of the blog as a vehicle for the kind of criticism/reporting we are doing here. Clearly, it is a format that has different "best use" parameters than most other mediums, a strange hybrid somewhere between a weekly magazine and Twitter. I'll likely come back to this idea in a week or two, after the hustle of the auctions and AIPAD has worn off.