“…media has always had the inherent problem of separating out the wheat from the chaff, the insightful from the banal, the incisive from the divisive. Such is the price for the democratization of speech that the Internet brings: anyone with a computer has equal access. It’s probably true that most of everything is crap-but it’s a shame that we must work so hard to find the non-crap.” – Ben Radford
In a recent post on the Center for Inquiry’s website titled “Still Skeptical of Blogs,” Ben Radford shares why he feels that “most blogs are generally worthless” by noting many problems he has with blogging, blogs, and bloggers. In the spirit of Radford’s post — and as I usually do — I will summarize Radford’s analysis and offer some commentary of my own.
Radford notes that although the internet has allowed for more transmission of information [because anyone with a computer, spare time, and an opinion can blog], this hasn’t improved the quality of information. With more available information and — as Radford notes — over 120 million blogs, the “signal to noise ratio is higher than ever.”