As avid readers here will know, I wrote a deliberately provocatively entitled story Is TH!NK ABOUT IT dying? in an effort to stoke up some discussion about how the Is TH!NK ABOUT IT project is doing as we enter the half way stage. In it I worried about a lack of posts and discussion and concluded that it was most probably because most people found the EU a difficult subject to blog and read about in an interesting or entertaining way.
In a subsequent post I argued that we needed to be able to state What difference will the EP Elections make for you? if we were going to be successful in raising awareness and interest in the EP elections amongst a wider public.
The first post attracted 30 comments and seem to hit a nerve. The second post attracted only 5 responses, and none answered the question “What difference will the EP Elections make for you?”!!! Even on the European Tribune, a specialist European political site where I cross posted the story and where stories often attract 100’s of comments, little discussion ensued, and few gave examples of how the EP elections might make a significant difference to the EU in general, or to their lives in particular.
Then Etan Smallman did a story suggesting Th!nk About It is alive and kicking and gave the example of how a video of Daniel Hannan attacking Gordon Brown in the European Parliament in a very polemical way had gone viral on Twitter and YouTube particularly after it was highlighted by ultra-right wing US sites like the Drudge Report and Rush Limbaugh.
I’m not quite sure how the fact that an extreme but very articulate polemical attack on Brown (by a Conservative who had previously argued that Britain should follow the Icelandic model of deregulation) had gone viral after it was highlighted by extremely popular US sites is supposed to prove that the TH!NK ABOUT IT project is alive and kicking.
Perhaps it proves that a story about a controversial speech can become newsworthy in the MSM (mainstream media) if it appeals to very popular media/political sites even if it relates to a speech in the European parliament. But would it have been any less popular had it been delivered in the House of Commons? - Because its subject matter assuredly related to an internal British left/right political debate, and had nothing specifically to do with the EU at all.
So it seems to me to be clutching at straws to suggest that a speech about an internal British policy dispute, which happened to be delivered in the European Parliament, somehow suggests that the Th!nk About It project is alive and kicking and that the project has so far been a success.
At most it suggests that a well delivered polemical speech directed at a prominent politician, if it feeds into a certain powerful antagonistic political agenda, can become prominent even if it has only been delivered in the European Parliament. It seems to me it was enabled more by the presence of television cameras than by any inherent power or influence of the Parliament itself, and ironically it achieved prominence only because it fed into the political agenda of those who are also hypercritical of the EU.
So where does this leave us with regard to the Th!nk About project? Does it suggest that we should be as controversial as possible, feed into the agenda of powerful political or media groups, and in that way achieve some prominence in the MSM? Is that what a successful outcome of the Th!nk About It project would look like? Should we be writing stories about the EU mandating straight bananas, about CAP overspending, or of bureaucratic inefficiency or corruption - anything which plays into the dominant “Europe is a bloated bureaucracy” narrative. Are we wasting our time writing reasoned criticisms or good news stories about the EP elections?
Certainly two of the posts which seemed to have generated some discussion here are my rhetorical question “Is thinkaboutit dying” (deliberately provocatively put) and Ari’s piece on “Nato’s attack on Serbia” which outrageously seemed to suggest that NATO was morphing into the new Nazism.
But is Thinkaboutit achieving it’s objectives if only provocative pieces get a significant reaction? How do we measure Thinkaboutit’s success? - number of posts, comments, ratings, readers, links from other blogs, mentions in the Main Stream Media?
Perhaps the EJC gave some success metrics to the EC in their funding submission? It would be helpful if we knew how the success of the overall project is going to be measured.
I can write polemics criticising e.g. the EU’s lack of a coordinated and dynamic response to the economic depression, or throw metaphorical insults at our leaders. If they are picked up by the MSM, does that represent success? On the other hand if we only write worthy pieces stressing the importance of the EP elections which nobody reads or responds to but which please the European Commission, is that success??
Perhaps it would be useful to have a discussion on what a successful outcome to the Thinkaboutit project would look like for you? Perhaps the EJC itself would like to comment?
Is it about the number of posts, comments, ratings, registered users, hits, links from other blogs, mentions in the MSM, or indeed if we manage to whip up some controversy or make some outrageous allegations?
Is it the quality of the posts themselves and the degree to which they contribute to a greater and wider understanding of what the EU is about? Is it about us having a good time, getting enthused about the EU and spreading that interest amongst our peers? How will the European Commission decide it has gotten good value for its investment in this project? Is it enough for it to feel “with it” for having engaged with a bunch of “new media” bloggers?
How would you measure the success of the project? By the prizes you won, by the friends and contacts you made, by the increased knowledge of the EU you have gained, by the number of your friends and acquaintances you have motivated to vote in the election? All of the above?
And if these are our criteria for the success of the project, how have we been doing so far? I would like to suggest, contrary to my deliberately controversially entitled piece Is TH!NK ABOUT IT dying? that we are really not doing so badly at all.
As 
At least we’re still up and running, posting some interesting stories, attracting some comments, and getting more people involved. We don’t have to be posting outrageous stories which might attract MSM interest in order to be a success.
(As long as we are learning, attracting interest, involving more people, and yes, actually ENJOYING ourselves, this project can be a success. - Psst - don’t tell the European Commission that that’s really what blogging is all about!)
(8 votes, average: 3.50 out of 5)
Loading ...
Nice post.
My two cents: you have to write about things as you actually see them, not as they could/should be. This will be most valuable to your readers.
If people don’t find the European elections exciting, and TH!NK ABOUT IT isn’t changing their minds, then that’s what you should write about (which is exactly what you seem to be doing!).
Then, afterwards, you can look at why this is happening, what the consequences of it might be, and, finally, if things could be different.
You should feel free to criticise TH!NK ABOUT IT and the EU as much as you want (although never unfairly).
What does a successful TH!NK ABOUT IT project look like for me? It looks like an enlarged, strengthened EU blogosphere being in place after the competition is over. It looks like you (and your fellow bloggers) making contacts and getting a taste for blogging about the EU.
It looks like all of you learning more about the tools of blogging (so make sure you teach yourself how to thread conversations in WordPress!)
It’s a slow process, and the results may take a long time coming, but at the end of the competition, if people continue blogging about the EU, then TH!NK ABOUT IT has been a success.
Many thanks Josef, for a great contribution to the debate. Judging a blogging enterprise after just 2 months would be unfair in any case - building up a blog audience and participation is a slow process and is a bit like the marketing equivalent of building up a brand. You have to have a good product in the first place, and even then it takes a long time to get it known in the marketplace=blogosphere.
We are currently only in the R&D phase of product development. Trying to figure out how the technology works and what the potential readership might like. What turns bloggers off, and what turns them on.
I sense there is a great deal of positive goodwill towards the project, and yet a great deal of uncertainty about how we can all make our contribution. That is why I am doing my thinking “out loud” right here on the blog, because I’m not too sure how I should proceed myself.
Do I pick out particularly stupid/interesting/outrageous newspaper articles or video snippets like the Hannon speech and highlight/criticise/praise them? Do I write my own more philosophical pieces? Do I interview all the EP candidates I can find to get their take on the future of the parliament? Do I dissect the policy platforms of the competing parties?
Personally I don’t want to try and compete with the MSM and just report on speeches, policy documents, or personalities. I want to try and analyse and =understand what the Parliament is about and why it has failed to engage with the popular imagination of most people in most member states. And how that situation might change in the future.
Such an approach inevitably involves a degree of speculation and creative thinking. A willingness to consider new models of political action. I don’t think we should try to pretend - like the MSM - that we are merely reporting the news. We are the news of what might make the EU a more vibrant community and Demos in the future!
first things first: you have to provide me a living and i will write the coolest, most interesting blog ever - or i’ll be busy with making money for the heating instead of th!nking with you guys - though the latter i would prefer.
one eye
the other
Hi rekapapp,
Write to the European Commission with a proposal to run a Euroblog! Perhaps there is a living to be made from blogging but Markos of the Daily Kos is the only one I know of who has succeeded in doing so, and that is in the much more developed US blogosphere. Otherwise, I’m afraid it has to be a labour of love. If you don’t enjoy doing it, don’t do it!
the funny thing is thtat i enjoy this, and not the one for money.
my boyfriend just quit his job as a well paid journalist a few months ago, and became a mean paid activist, and it all turned around: now he hates his activism, which seems to take all his time up, and eagers to write and film again.
maybe the question is not blogging (writing, filming, whatever: creating) or jobbing, but how much
of course you are right: no one should blog without love.
I’m fairly new to this whole blogging thing, but I’ve picked up bits and pieces of advice from across the internet. Here’s a brief summary of my conception of how to approach blogging:
Firstly, obviously, different people have different approaches. One thing a lot of people seem to stress, however, is the importance of blogging about what you actually find interesting.
Don’t go looking for an audience by blogging on subjects which might interest other people, but which don’t actually interest you. Rather, let people who share your interests (no matter how specific) find you and become your audience.
Blog consistently, regularly and at a high standard on all your favourite subjects, and you will attract people who share your interests.
Also, see your audience as very much part of the process. Bloggers are exploring new technology, and we should explore it properly. It’s easy to get caught in the trap of seeing blogging as an extension of print media, but they are completely different things. Interact with your audience and use them to help you blog.
Finally, don’t make things personal. Criticise people’s arguments, but keep things friendly. The EU blogosphere is a very small place, and the same characters seem to turn up everywhere. If you’re rude or attack someone, you’ve lost a valuable part of your audience. And you need an audience which disagrees with you as much as it agrees, or you’ll have no debate, and you’ll end up with a very one-sided view of things.
Also, something more specific to political and current affairs blogging: I think it’s important to try and play to the strengths of running a one-person blog.
Mainstream media have fantastic resources which allow them to churn out a lot of breaking news and highly-polished content, making it impossible (as you pointed out) to compete with them as an actual news source. But as one person with a blog, you can actually interact with your audience, publicly, and get a debate going.
Meh… ultimately, though, what do I know? You got yourself noticed by asking provocative questions about the TH!NK ABOUT IT project, so maybe the way to go is attention grabbing headlines. We’re all still exploring this blogosphere thing.
Well put Josef - that pretty much sums upmy view of blogging. It may just be coincidence, but things seem to have livened up here in terms of the number of posts/comments/discussions since I asked the question: Is thinkaboutit dying? Maybe people just needed to be prodded into action. Many of my posts arise out of discussions, and without discussion they whole thing (for me at least) just seems dead. You’re not learning if nobody responds either positively or negatively and even the most snarky conversations can often be turned around into something more considered and positive.
Building a blogging community - especially around a subject like the EU is a hard thing to do, but the EJC seem to have made a good start.