The headless body still functions!

Class tonight, sans Colin, worked out really nicely I think. I was nervous someone would seize leadership and monopolize the conversation, but to my relief we all spoke in turn and attentively listened to one another. There was a real sense of an even exchange of ideas and genuine, attentive interaction. There were, of course, a few individuals who spoke oftener than others (and I thank them for providing the discussion's shape), but for the most part, the class was relatively vocal and focused. Toward the end of claa side conversations began to sprout, but a core class discussion remained regardless.

We chatted about ethics and whether or not there should be a "cred stamp" of sorts that bloggers--personal and otherwise--may attain by observing a certain degree of dedication to truthfulness, objectivity, transparency and the like. I think that for political blogs, scientific blogs, and blogs discussing scholarly information, this would be useful in order to distinguish "good" information from "bad" information. For personal bloggers, though, what do we care about their cred? Visitors to personal blogs would probably be equally okay with knowing they're popping in for fiction as much as they are for fact. Then again, this also means that bloggers are under no obligation whatsoever to even try to represent reality or truthiness (what is reality and truthiness if reality is perception, anyway?), which is the current case. Personal moral and ethical standards rule the day. Some of us are devoid of them. Some of us make bad choices. Some people get hurt--end of story. Honestly, I don't think personal blogs should be regulated.

At some point Kristen brought up the Rosen article. We then discussed how sometimes people don't even know they're being blogged about (in the case of Debbie's swains), and I believe Brenda brought up the point that failing to divulge one's own identity but readily supplying that of others is a big no-no in ethical blogging. I got to thinking at this point about Coffee. Being someone who has read her ENTIRE blog, I've noticed that she is, in fact, the paragon of blogging ethics. She never reveals the true identities (save that of her best friend Kat) of the people in her blog--not even the despicable men she reviles. I think that's actually pretty impressive. Coffee maintains her credibility and her blog ethics by not identifying herself or those who fall into the coding of her blogs by name. That's no mean feat.

As we chatted in class today I listened carefully to the kinds of comments the people in our classroom were making and it struck me, finally, that we are all so very bloggy. We're the kind of people who enjoy the subversive, the divisive, enjoy satire and parody and biting sarcasm. We berate ourselves and everyone around us--we are, in many ways, social critics. Kind of cool. We are, I think, readily identifiable as a blogging community, even away from the cyberrealm.

Peace out for now. The thesis beckons. And by beckons I mean screeches.