Sullivan Response

I found Sullivan’s “Why I Blog” to be very insightful on not only his experience blogging, but also at how blogging was viewed when it first started.  He talks about how he is instantly hooked on the free-form style and I get that.  I enjoy how blogging is just from the writer directly to the reader, without any editors or fact checkers in the middle.  Yes, blogging can be accident prone, but that is part of the fun.  He also talked about how blogging has an unfinished tone, like a never ending story.  The blogger just keeps adding his or her thoughts and people can choose to read it or not. 

I can see why Sullivan gravitated towards blogging after reading his article.  As opposed to when he worked for The New Republic blogging is much quicker and easier.  He complained about the “the endless delays, revisions, office politics, editorial fights, and last-minute cuts for space” that come with regular publishing, and I can see how that could be frustrating.  Blogs are a writer’s dream.  It’s means for someone to instantly publish themselves and it’s a medium that can potentially reach anyone on the planet.  To those who put down blogging as inaccurate and unprofessional, Sullivan brings up “the fierce, immediate scrutiny” of the blogs readers.  He also seems to like how blogs are short as opposed to other mediums.  People don’t go online looking for massive articles to read.  People like there information to be short and sweet, and blogging caters to that.  Sullivan clearly enjoys the freedom and speed of blogging and so do I.  It short, sweet, and an enjoyable means for someone to get his or her opinion out there.