There is a great thread that starts with Jay Rosen picking up on Bill Keller (editor of the NY Times) complaining that in the blogosphere arguments never end. It’s a throwaway phrase, but Jay is right to pick up on the mindset in which it’s a plausible complaint. Jeff Jarvis solos on the melody, and Scott Rosenberg brings it on home with the observation that the complaint is really about who gets to end the argument.

This is one of the top five most important effects of the Internet*: We are not going to settle our arguments. There’s enough room on the Web to permit that. You argue for a bit, maybe you learn a little or maybe the argument hardens your position so that you become a little stupider, and then you move on to something else. That’s why the “conversation” meme is so powerful: Conversations are explorations, not title fights.

The big question is whether we can adapt this lesson of the Web to the real world with its finite space and inescapable proximities. If we’re never all going to agree, can we at least all keep talking? [Tags: blogs bill_keller nytimes jay_rosen jeff_jarvis scott_rosenberg postmodernism]

*No, I don’t have a list of the top five. I was bluffing.

Categories: Uncategorized dw