Happy 500 blog posts to me ...

Five Hundred. That's the number of blog posts I've written since Oct. 7, 2008, less than a week after I was laid off from a newspaper career spanning more than 30 years. I was one of thousands of journalists turned out by newspapers, broadcasters and other news media as revenues tanked in 2008. I started the blog as an outlet for my opinions and a means of keeping in touch with folks who had read my ramblings for years. This is the 500th entry in Erstwhile Editor, the blog that took up where my former Downing Street blog left off (and was summarily killed by the newspaper that had encouraged me to write it; it no longer exists in cyberspace).

To mark this occasion (I won't call it auspicious), I thought I'd look back at my blog posts, relive some of the news events or emotions that prompted those posts, and share with the few readers still turning to this blog on occasion some of the more memorable posts. I thought I'd compile a sort of "best of" the first 500 blog entries by Erstwhile Editor. But after spending nearly an hour just looking through the three months of entries in 2008, I decided covering the entire 22 months of blogging might be more ambitious a project than I want to tackle tonight.

Those first 91 entries in 2008 set the tone I had promised in my first post — random thoughts and analysis about politics, newspapers, literature, family and life. I wrote a good bit at first about being laid off. It was a new experience for me, but I was determined not to be bitter or vengeful. I found some quiet beauty in the solitude of an empty house during the workday. And I found some awkward moments when people expressed shock that I was no longer at the paper. But after several weeks, I fell into a new routine and had to remind myself not to get too comfortable. Losing a job, even with the support of family of friends, is traumatic, and I wrote about that, too. I gradually became accustomed to a new role with my wife as the breadwinner.

I also wrote about the profession I had given my working life to. I was sad, both personally and professionally, about the demise of newspapers. I still read the newspaper daily, but the news from the world of journalism was not good in 2008. Both national newspapers and local publications ran into trouble at the end of 2008. And while it seemed everyone else was getting a stimulus or a tax break, newspapers weren't.

But one unexpected topic got a lot of my attention at the end of 2008. My best friend from high school was diagnosed with an inoperable brain tumor a few months before I was laid off. I drove nearly 400 miles in one day to see him, bedridden by then, and share memories. Later, unexpectedly, I received the dreaded news. Days later, I drove down for the memorial service and shared more memories with people I'd lost track of over the years. This blog took a turn I had not expected when I started, but I wanted to write about life, and death is part of that. I attended another funeral during those last months of 2008. It was sad but uplifting and inspiring, setting just the right tone for a requiem for a man of faith.

I followed the 91 posts of 2008 with 294 in 2009. I slowed down a bit when I took a job near the end of that year (after a year out of work), but I've still managed to write 500 blog posts in less than two years. I never had pretensions or great hopes for this blog, and it has lived up to low expectations. It was little more than an outlet for my thoughts and opinions. In that regard, 500 posts and 22 months later, it has served its purpose.

Three quick observations

A few quick observations for the blogosphere:

• While I waited in a checkout line Friday, the young woman behind the register looked at my name and asked, "Are you the guy who writes those editorials on the Internet?" "I write a blog," I said. "Yeah, I thought you looked familiar." When I began writing a blog, I continuously invited people to read it. Few did, I'm sure, but I picked up a handful of followers and occasionally received comments from friends who said they'd read a blog post. But having a stranger tell me she reads my blog was a pleasant surprise. The (invisible) counter on my blog turns up the occasional reader from California or Dubai, but the vast majority of readers are from Wilson or the surrounding area.

• As I was listening to an NPR program earlier this week, the radio host began an interview with a person she identified as "a professional blogger." I was impressed. There are millions of blogs out there. There can't be more than a handful of people making a living at it. I've occasionally considered adding Google ads to this blog, but the return (fractions of cents per click) hardly seems worth the bother.

• Wilson residents frequently complain, with good reason, about our high electric rates. Thanks to a multi-billion debt, NCEMPA, which provides electricity to Wilson and 31 other eastern N.C. cities, has high debt payments, and these member cities charge above-average rates to pay off that debt. When our utility bill arrived this week, I first noticed the somewhat higher-than-expected total. Then I looked at the breakdown. Water and sewer service, it turns out, amounted to more than electric costs. That's a reminder that Wilson has high water rates than many neighboring cities. I caught some flak at the newspaper when I wrote a story noting that Rocky Mount would sell the water it was buying from Wilson cheaper than Wilson sold to its residential customers. Rocky Mount's water rates are lower than Wilson's. But Wilson, thanks to its investment in water infrastructure (primarily Buckhorn Reservoir), had water to spare; Rocky Mount didn't.

This blog has served its purpose

I began this blog Oct. 7, 2008, a few days after being unceremoniously laid off by the newspaper for which I had worked for 29 years. There was little comfort in knowing I was not the only one being shown the door, nor was there any comfort later when more former colleagues were also dismissed. As the "about me" section says, I started this blog to fill my need to write and to express opinions. Although I'm still waiting to be recognized as a "blog of note" by Blogger or to reach triple digits of "followers," I have filled my need to write. Posting to this blog has shaped the start of my day as I checked headlines, thought about life and pondered what it means to be an unemployment statistic. I have attracted a few readers. The (invisible) counter I use says about 2,000 unique visitors per month look at this blog. That's not an impressive statistic, but it's something.

One of the important aspects of blogging is simply showing up. You need to blog daily, or more often, to give your audience a reason to keep coming back. With more than 350 posts in just over a year, I've been here almost every day, and I've enjoyed it. As I told students when I was teaching English many years ago, writing helps you to think. Organizing your thoughts and putting them down on paper (or the computer screen) forces you to think about your assertions and defend them. That process, day after day, has been an outlet and a learning process for me.

I'm happy to report that my 382 days of joblessness end Monday. I begin a new job, a new career, a new schedule, a new focus, a new commitment and new responsibilities. Although I have no intention of abandoning this blog, it will have to take a lower priority. I might not be posting early each morning. I might not be posting every day. If that weakens its impact and reduces its audience, it can't be helped.

I started this blog to help me keep in the practice of writing every day while I searched for a new job. Having found a job, I have less need for this blog. Several people have told me they read this blog regularly. I hope they will continue to do so — and to understand if my posts are less frequent. I've enjoyed blogging and plan to continue doing it as much as I can.

Can't we be civil to each other?

A few comments about blogs, mutual respect and civil discourse. First, thanks to Ginny for her recent comments chiding some commenters for their insulting language and lack of civility in their comments on this blog. She was offended by commenters who couldn't express their opinions without using terms such as "freaks," "morons," "stupid," etc. I had allowed those words to get through, but I had rejected some comments that were even less civil (if you can imagine).

Subsequently, I was criticized by a commenter going by the name of "jamally" for "selectively allowing nasty comments." I suspect "jamally" was the person who posted an anonymous comment saying that a deceased public figure was now burning in hell. That comment was too much for me, more offensive than the name-calling that I had cringingly allowed. I wish Blogger's software would allow me to edit out offensive portions of comments while leaving the civil opinions, but it doesn't.

The nasty comments on this blog — and the even nastier comments that often appear on major newspapers' news articles — testify to the loss of civil discourse and mutual respect in this country, especially regarding political issues. The spread of the anonymous Internet culture has contributed to this. Hiding behind a cloak of anonymity, some people feel comfortable saying whatever vile, insulting remarks that come to mind. Cable television has also contributed to this cultural shift. To feed the 24-hour news monster, stations turn to discussion groups, always pitting true believers from opposite sides against each other. At times, tempers flare and opinions give way to insults. Such nastiness infects all of society. This goes back a long way. William F. Buckley and Gore Vidal famously got into a shouting match while offering commentary on the 1968 presidential campaign.

Two people can disagree and remain civil and respectful. Upon this principle is built the American tradition of democratic debate and compromise. Unfortunately, both Republicans and Democrats have hardened their positions and often portray their opposition's position as the embodiment of evil, even when their differences are slight. Ted Kennedy, who has been lauded this week for his skills at compromising with the opposition, was also guilty of demonizing people he opposed, such as Robert Bork. His opponents' portrayal of George W. Bush as a satanic idiot has been matched, maybe surpassed, by Barack Obama's opponents' portrayal of him as a Muslim ineligible for the presidency. Can we no longer accept our presidents as honorable people with whom we disagree? Must we also think of them as malevolent?

Disagreement can be civil. I offer this example by commenter MP, who strongly disagreed with my post about prosecution of CIA agents over detainee interrogations. His response was rational and directed to the issue itself, and he achieved the goal of argumentation: making his point. I agree with him to a large degree. The United States must uphold its humanitarian principles, even in matters of espionage and interrogation. My concern is that the United States should not prosecute its employees in 2009 for actions the government itself authorized in 2004.

Commenting on this blog and on the news

The comments link at the bottom of this and every post on this blog invites you to add your perspective to what I've written here. Just what it is that incites comments I haven't quite figured out yet. Often, it's the oddest things that get comments going. I like to get comments because they affirm that someone is taking the time to read what I've taken the time to write.

Shortly after starting this blog, I began monitoring the comments — reviewing them before they are posted on the blog. I had become concerned that the comments could become nothing more than irrelevant rants, not the civil discourse I had hoped to share. Since that time, I've rejected only a handful of comments. The most recent rejected comment was nothing more than a promotion of a "Fair Tax" Web site. That comment was irrelevant to my post about the state budget and state taxes. The Fair Tax folks are lobbying for reform of federal taxes.

One recent anonymous comment took me to task for allowing a commenter to tell an earlier commenter to "get a life." Anonymous 2 thought such insults cheapened the blog and risked turning it into a tawdry tempest. Anonymous 2 asked that his comment not be posted; it was just a message to me. My problem is that Blogger, the Google software I'm using to create this blog, doesn't allow editing of comments. I can accept them in their entirety or reject them in their entirety. So I've allowed a few "get a life" type comments added to the end of otherwise relevant or thoughtful comments.

I've also received a few e-mails about this blog (a link can be found in my profile). One recent one lamented the decline of the local press. "I have canceled my subscription and so have many others," this person wrote. "At least when you were with the paper there was news."

So I've been thinking: Would Wilson support an alternative newspaper, or perhaps an alternative news Web site? By support, I mean, would local businesses spend their money to advertise on a Web site or in another newspaper? Newspapers derive 80 percent or more of their income from advertising, and it has been a loss of advertising that has created a crisis in American newspapers. News Web sites, which are proliferating around the country, have lower overhead but have more difficulty attracting ad dollars. Either way, it's a risky venture and would require strong community support. Is it out there?

Old notes foretell emergence of blogs, new media

While cleaning out a notebook, I found notes I had taken at a N.C. Press Association meeting about four years ago. The topic was new media, such as blogs. At the time, I was not writing a blog, but the topic fascinated me. Bloggers, aggregators and other pioneers in the new media were changing the way people got their information.

I returned to the office and typed up my notes and began bugging my boss and the IT director about adding more user options to our newspaper Web site. A key part of the seminar I had attended dealt with RSS (Really Simple Syndication), and one of the speakers showed how people could use RSS to, essentially, create their own online newspaper devoted only to news that interested them. I asked if our newspaper Web site had RSS capability. No one knew. They would look into it. When I brought it up again later, I was told, "Now tell me again what that is." I don't know to this day whether RSS feeds are offered on the newspaper's Web site.

I learned that blogging, even in that early day of blogs, Flicker, Facebook and all the rest, was threatening to change the entire news environment. Government agencies, for example, could use blogs to promulgate news without having to go through the filtering by professional media. There are millions of blogs out there, but most (like this one) are not widely read. Collectively, they provide a gargantuan amount of information or opinion, so much so that a term has been coined to describe the information overload that any online user faces. "Data smog" describes the fact that there is so much information out there that our brains are incapable of processing it all.

Just as upper-class and even middle-class people once had servants to provide their basic needs (such as cooking and laundry), readers once had traditional media (also derisively called the mainstream media) to filter through the volumes of information and select the most important and most interesting items for dissemination to the general public. Now traditional media are becoming anachronistic, just as household servants are quaint relics of the past. But the work of filtering through the avalanche of information has not disappeared; it has become more difficult as speedier communications increased the volume. The work done by household servants hasn't disappeared; someone still has to do it. Someone — everyone who takes the matters seriously — has to filter through the "data smog" to find those things that are credible, important and interesting.

When I taught journalism classes, I spent a class or two defining news. The textbook would provide a simple, straightforward list of factors that create news: magnitude, proximity, rarity, public importance, human interest, impact, etc. Those criteria have guided the editors and reporters at mainstream media for decades, and I doubt that media critics or bloggers could present a persuasive argument that these traditional criteria are wrong. The new media put bloggers, readers, RSS recipients and others in the position of selecting the information that is important, that is news. But for most people, this is not a full-time job. They don't have 40 hours a week to spend perusing news reports and selecting the best, as traditional editors do, or did. This new media, if traditional media continue to decline, puts great pressure on readers, who must be both reader and editor, with little time for either.

Another problem is that selective news consuming, whether by RSS feeds, blogs or simple Web searches, eliminates the serendipitous effects of reading a newspaper. You might turn a page and find a story on a topic that you knew nothing about — one that you'd never select for an RSS feed or a Google search — but that you find interesting, even fascinating. Such pleasant surprises can happen every day for a newspaper reader, but rarely, if ever, for new media consumers.