To Blog or Not to Blog?

          While reading chapter 4 of Brian Carroll's Writing for Digital Media, I thought that it was really cool that I actually hyperlinked my sources in my first blog post. He talks about how important it is and how adding hyperlinks to primary sources gives someone's site more credibility. I actually only hyperlinked them after seeing that someone else had done the same. Realizing that it could be done, I played with my settings on Blogger and found out how to do this!

          Another thing that I thought was pretty coincidental is that Carroll referenced Jeff Jarvis in chapter 4 while talking about his golden rule of hyperlinking: "Link unto others' good stuff as you would have them link unto your good stuff", and that I had embedded a video of Jarvis speaking about the decline of newspapers in my previous post! I think I am definitely on the right track with this whole blogging thing, according to Carroll at least.

          Later on in the chapter, Carroll compares websites and what he thinks are good headlines as well as general layout of the site. I thought this was specifically interesting and relatable since Furman University (aka the school I attend) has just redone their website. It is incredibly more visual and aesthetically pleasing compared to the past site. My friends and I used to joke that to get anywhere within the Furman site, it would be easier to just google it rather than search using the site. With the new design, the website seems to be much easier to navigate as well as keep the attention of any user that is on it. Should websites cater to this new era or stay with their roots? Why or why not? What are the benefits of each side?

          Later on, in chapter 7, Carroll discusses the evolution of the blog and the advantages that it has. Specifically, he discusses the debate between journalists and bloggers. Are bloggers journalists or vice versa? He uses the analogy "is anyone with a camera a photographer?" (146). I own a camera and do take pictures. I consider myself a photographer. I may not be the best, or even an amateur, but I am a photographer. I believe the same to be of bloggers. Journalism, to me at least, is a level of blogging that some people aspire to be. They are journalists in the big world, who work for newspapers and big companies, but they all had to start somewhere. I think that journalists are people who are employed, while bloggers can earn money too, they are just self-employed if they devote that much time to it. Why should bloggers be considered journalists or vice versa? Should there be a standard?