ouch!

well if the number of phone calls and emails that I had today as a result of the article from people and businesses wanting to explore how to start a blog are anything to go by, people still want these kind of articles Charles.

btw:

1. who would you rather be quoted as authorities on blogging in Australia? Last time I checked your Aussie A-list included both Trevor and myself? :-)

2. I didn't see Cameron quoted or mentioned in the article - did you see some version the rest of us didn't?

My remarks weren't intended as a slight on you or Trevor, Darren. You both have great expertise, which is why - as you point out - I've quoted you.

But practically every journalist quotes you. They just love the six-figure income line.

My point, with the greatest possible respect, is that you're not the only experts in town, and it would be interesting to get some other opinions.

Once people get established in the default journalistic contact book, they seem to be there for life.

And Cameron wasn't quoted in this story, but how often is he wheeled out?

I hear what you're saying but as you said - the journalist seemed to have gone out of his way to find some fresh voices in this article.

I'd also argue that three times featured/quoted in articles in 6 month's (the number of articles I've been mentioned in Aussie media since November last year) isn't really a 'gagable level' in my mind. 'practically every journalist quotes you' might be a bit of an overly dramatic exageration.

I'd say you're over-exposed. A half-page article in the SMH on March 11, picked up March 13 by The Age.

May 11 an interview in The Age/SMH about blogging and the technologies that you use and value.

Another article in The Age/SMH on June 15. (Unfortunately they've both got the same heading: "A blog's life".)

This, mind you, after one in November. One in August. Another on July 15. Three days before that, another one in The Australian.

Guess we have to agree to disagree. I don't count the SMH/Age articles as separate ones as they are to different audiences. Todays I'd hardly count as massive exposure really as it was a short quote in a larger article.

In the scheme of things I'd hardly call it over exposure - each one has had it's own focus and has had worthwhile payoff.

Anyway - I'm off to bed.

You don't have difficulty reconciling your first comment "Well if the number of phone calls and emails that I had today as a result of the article from people and businesses wanting to explore how to start a blog are anything to go by, people still want these kind of articles Charles."

with ...

"Today's I'd hardly count as massive exposure really as it was a short quote in a larger article"?

I'm sure there's been a worthwhile payoff for you. I'm not sure if readers could say the same thing. And there are many energetic and accomplished bloggers out there who might benefit from having their views, experiences and achievements recognised.

And again, I'm not slighting you personally. You've worked hard, you deserve your success, and you've put quite a bit back into the blogging community.

It's scarcely surprising that you don't think you're over-exposed. I'd like to know whether readers agree.

I don't have a problem with those two statements.

I guess I was trying to get at the fact that yesterdays article devoted a couple of sentences to me - in comparison to other bloggers featured it was on the smaller side of the exposure. It did bring a bit of traffic but also some calls and emails which to me indicated that readers reacted positive to the article.

Your original post said that you felt it was time to move on from this type of story, that it wasn't news anymore.

All I was trying to illustrate (badly as it was late) was that some people obviously did find it news because most of those who contacted me were new to the idea and practice of blogging.

Whether I'm over exposed or not from my handful of media appearances or not is I guess a matter of opinion. I don't feel that this is the case.

I've not heard any negative feedback from the articles/quotes and if anything it's just been a positive reinforcement of the message that I write about.

Of course you're right that I guess it's up to readers to work out for themselves but the only places I can think to look for their opinion is in my inbox (quite a positive response) and in the comments/mashup to the article, which have little to say about the matter. Perhaps today will bring the flood of negative comments to this thread from readers - I'm willing to listen to them - but so far the only concern to my over exposure is from your lips.

Of course as a senior journalist your words are taken on board and not dismissed lightly - but until I see evidence of it with my own eyes I guess I'll keep plodding along the way I'm going.

That was the funniest thread of comments I've read in a long time, thanks fellas.

Those of us spending every day on the bleeding edge are way over-exposed to the new. What's old for us is still fresh for the masses.

If it feels done to death, spend a bit more time with 'real' people - most of whom, in my experience, still don't know what a blog is, much less why people are blogging and what it means for society.

Blogging is far from done to death. It won't even have broken the surface until it's:

- Been the subject of scare segments on A Current Affair, Sixty Minutes and Today Tonight

- Been the main point of a character on Neighbours and the cause of a terrible accident on All Saints

- The theme of a lame, shortlived magazine from IDG

- The add-on side-show section to CeBIT Australia

...and when it truly has been finally done to death, it won't be our announcement to make. Kathy Lette will make it, or Rove McManus. We can't be the heralds of the bleeding edge while also being the grim reapers of the trailing edge!

I'm not overly fussed who gets quoted, as long as they're using Aussie examples. Check back a before Darren and Trevor started getting exposure and EVERY quote came from the U.S. I was as frustrated as hell when I saw Scoble's quotes appear in Aussie newspapers constantly.

I think we've still got a long way to come with blogging being recognized in Australia. Many people still don't understand it, so it's great to see the MSM continuing to give it exposure.

Rich

I think Charles is right. There is a tendency towards being lazy in journalism - do a news search and phone those people up who've been quoted as the authority before. I'm guilty of that myself. Or it could be down to the fixed ideas of the editor. I know when I wrote about food bloogers for Gourmet Traveller the constraints led me to trot out the predictable big names, although I tried to find some new voices too. Perhaps one problem is identifying local bloggers, as few have a .au url. Maybe with the arrival of Gnoos it will be easier to find new local voices to quote.

"until I see evidence of it with my own eyes I guess I'll keep plodding along the way I'm going."

[Mutter, mutter]. It's not the way YOU'RE going, dammit. It's the way the bloody Press is going.

Your reaction reminds me of that hilarious commencement address byStephen Colbert: "But enough about me. If there can ever be enough about me."

Charles
I see what you are saying, but I can't agree, because the problem isn't with the bloggers, but both with the Australian media, and in part, the Australian blogosphere in itself, not the people named in the article.

The Australian media is insular in how far and wide it looks to start with, I'm not accusing you of this, but some of your fellow journalists are, and dare one say they are lazy, so picking the "obvious" candidates is par for the corse.

But we do play a part in this, because we don't make it easy, collectively, as the Australian blogosphere, to make it easy to find great Australian blogging examples. To say that isn't to point a finger at any one person, but there still lacks a way of finding top Australian bloggers easily, Australianblogs.com.au and gnoos aside. I've got a Australian meme tracker planned that might help here....but I'm not sure if it's the answer.

But Duncan, don't the above comments, such as "My remarks weren't intended as a slight on you or Trevor, Darren ... Once people get established in the default journalistic contact book, they seem to be there for life", AND "It's not the way YOU'RE going, dammit. It's the way the bloody Press is going" indicate that I don't think the problem is with the bloggers, but with the media?