An Open Letter to Nick Carr

Dear Nick,

It's really nothing personal, but I just find myself disagreeing with so much of what you have to say.  My eyeglasses do not see the world the way you do and my experiences in the universe draw me to very different conclusions than you draw.

Yesterday, was no small example. I did not see your latest anti-blogosphere blog. The funny twist was that I would have missed your post entirely, had it not been for one Sterling "Chip" Camden who wrote a great reply to you.  I went on to comment without reading your post at that time, because reading you, well it generally pisses me off. Then I write something nasty about you and then you shoot back and you may enjoy this kind of stuff, but it may surprise you to learn I don't. So I just don't read your blog unless you start a conversation, such as this one, that I just can't let myself avoid.

But let's go back to your recent broadside that claims A-listers, like you and me, like Doc and Michael are the equivalent to feudal gate keepers was very well written.  I admire your ability to articulate so well, even if what you articulate is a fraud , innocent or otherwise.

What is so ironic to me is that according to Technorati, Chip is a mere 55,154th in ranking. While you are a formidable #610. Yet, he sent me to you.  You got my hit, and now you are getting my link and I suppose that will get you more traffic, just like Michael Arrington's link to you might help drive a nice blip in your traffic.

So who's keeping whose gate?  And for that matter is it an open or closed gate?

Let me take it from another point. Some of my best friends are A Plus Listers, Scoble, Doc and Arrington are people I know and like. But these days, I'm reading a lot more of Chip, Kami Huyse, David Parmet, Brian Oberkirch, Jeremiah Owyang,Tom Raftery and Josh Hallett, Chip and Brian Brown's Pajama Market, more than the latter trio. If these links send them traffic, I feel good.  Retaining the traffic is entirely up to them.

Who I read could--and probably will-- change tomorrow. Like all other blog readers, I have the right to choose and the right to be fickle. I have the right to link or not and so do you and so does everybody else. A committee does not get to decide from high within the castle.

So whose hand is on the gate? You have higher ranking than I do?  Would you say then, that you have a greater weight on this gate than I do? Why the Hell do I want to go into the castle anyway.  The weather is great out here. As one of those blog evangelists, you so disdain, why would I want to be inside the castle, where all the converted hang out anyway?

You raise the issue of Seth Finkelstein, whose blog I had not read until you pointed it out to me. Thanks for referring him to me and I will subscribe for a while.  Maybe he will keep my interest and maybe he won't.  Like the rest of us, if Seth wants to be an A-lister, he needs to not just do the right mechanical things, he needs to interest enough people enough of the time. He needs to have readers enthusiastic enough about what he has to say that they link to him and talk about him and catch his passion and get valuable information and insights on things they care about.  In short, he needs to be relevant.

At no point and in no space is there some Committee of the Anointed A-List sitting in a topdown boardroom deciding who should link and who should be linked to. This may be hard for you to understand, Nick, since you are such a lover of all things traditionally corporate.  You just cannot get your mind around anything that is organized from the bottom up.

The link I gave Seth might send a few people his way. He's picked up more than a few links, thanks to you. Now it's up to him to retain them. I raise this because I did a quick check, because I was not certain.  In the past month or so, it appears that over 70% of my outbound links went to people who are not considered A-Lister's Scoble's s over 50 and so is Doc Searls.  Of course this is true of Arrington, but let's disqualify him because he covers "little companies with funny names" as you so belligerently put it.

Nick, I read a few minutes ago that you are about to take a vacation.  I hope you enjoy your space away from the blogosphere. Don't worry about your rankings while you are away.  I'm sure when you come back, you will manage to offend enough lovers of this new conversational media, that your A-List ranking will remain secure.

The other thought is that maybe you should reflect on just quitting your blog. You don't like the blogosphere.  You certainly don't seem to like those of us who are dedicating lives and energy to its promotion, and--don't be offended by this Nick--we really won't miss you a whole lot if you just sit down and shut up.

Sincerely,

Shel Israel                                                                                                     Blog Evangelist

Comments

[ilona]

I'm coming late to the party on all counts, but reading in the flat dimension of unfamiliarity with what is obviously a history between you both, I'd say I found points of relevance in both your post and Carr's. I liked Carr's addition to the discussion simply because ( alright, besides how well written it was) I think he touched on a point that many bloggers feel, if they don't always know how to express. And perhaps that is behind why some really wonderful voices have dropped out of the blogosphere. Just saying "maybe". I think it bears considering, anyway.

I also appreciated your view here. It's encouraging to the everyday longtail blogger like me. Even when we don't have "a-list" on our horizon...we still are writing to be read and want to know what those experiencing higher profiles have to say on the topic. Thanks for providing some of that.

I still consider myself too new to blogging, or just slow on the uptake due to past lives on forums and static websites to be able to get a handle on what the blogsphere is "really doing".

[will]

You cant ask the king how his subjects are doing, you have to ask the subjects themselves. Its like George Bush pontificating on how lives in Iraq are better for the average Iraqi. Not Nick, nor Dan, nor Steve, nor Michael (nor Shel :)), can speak for me . . . another pointless debate that proves its equally pointless point . . .