Comments on: Why blogging matters to Lib Dems more than most

By: Matthew Pearce

Matthew Pearce — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 16:27:29 +0000

Stephen, why don’t YOU write for the Times or Telegraph? I can see no reason why at Conference Time there is no opportunity for a worthy scribe such as yourself to pen a daily record of activities for these snoozepapers.

By: Big Tall Tim

Big Tall Tim — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 14:16:40 +0000

YAB publicly supported the LDs at the last GE.
And I’m an admirer of hers

By: Paul Walter

Paul Walter — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 13:54:52 +0000

There are far too many awards and ratings in the blogosphere. There is almost a six month period every year with a constant succession of awards/ratings. It is quite ridiculous when you compare it to any other field of life. I think the awards/ratings tend to skew what people are offering, introduce an endemic atmosphere of ridiculous egotism, infuse a false purpose into the blogging arena and give some bloggers a ludicrously false of sense of importance. Though I can see their purpose for encouraging “newcomers” with “new blog of the year” awards.

That said, I am quite happy for LDV and any one else to carry on rating and awarding, and I was very grateful to be short-listed last year. Just count me out. It is against my core values and also bad for my health – and I note that at least one other person’s health has visibly been impacted by the award season this year.

By: Elizabeth Patterson

Elizabeth Patterson — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 09:11:14 +0000

Stephen, thanks for another very perceptive posting; blognews has provided an alternative political medium; I always read Guido before the Guardian nowadays for my political diet.
LD Voice site must also have my congratulations; for I see from Iaian Dale’s top 100 political blogs its promotion from 54 previously to 15 now.
And not forgetting the other LD sites that have risen in the league: Lynne Featherstone from 172 to 50, and Quaquam from 61 to 45.

As a poltical grassroot I am grateful to the blogworld.

By: Mark Wright

Mark Wright — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 08:49:28 +0000

Simon Jenkins manages to be insulting today even whilst totally agreeing with us:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/05/scotland.snp

He cant help it, it seems.

By: Steve Travis

Steve Travis — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 08:46:24 +0000

Woodpecker – YAB – please God, no!

By: boldkevin

boldkevin — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 07:44:58 +0000

I thought I read Jackie Ashley debating in her column which way she was going to vote in the Lib Dem leadership election.

By: Woodpecker

Woodpecker — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 22:14:25 +0000

I’m pretty sure Yasmin A-B is a Lib Dem, actually.

By: Bernard Salmon

Bernard Salmon — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 21:43:42 +0000

A few other names you could have mentioned who normally take a liberal line (although I have no idea whether any of them actually support the Lib Dems): Henry Porter, Jenni Russell, Tim Garton Ash, Robert Fisk. And one or two of the ones you mention, such as Steve Richards, are reasonably fair to the Lib Dems despite not being liberal supporters.

By: Stephen Tall

Stephen Tall — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 21:09:28 +0000

Actually, greg, I think all the ones I cite on right/left are identifiably partisan to one extent or another.

By: greg

greg — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:37:32 +0000

That’s because Liberal Democratism is a party political construct. All the writers you cite are identifiably “on the left”, “on the right” (or “on the fence”). Most are not, however, pushing party political views.

By: Sunny

Sunny — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 19:22:57 +0000

Well said. I think this is a strong reason for why there’s a need for a flourishing Libdem blogosphere.

Now you guys just need to be a bit more aggressive in challenging the MSM narratives