The Rise of the Liberal Blogosphere
In the introduction of my book, Bloggers on the Bus: How the Internet Changed Politics and the Press, I highlighted a YouTube clip from 2006, right after the mid-term elections, when blogger Chris Bowers is talking into the camera (I think) of Matt Stoller and Bowers answers the question: What does it take to be a liberal blogger? He starts listing all the requirements: "If you have no children, no one to support, and no career ambitions, then you too can become a full-time progressive blogger, as long as you're wiling to do nothing else in your entire life."
Bowers, who quit his job as a freshman English professor at Temple University at the beginning of the decade in order to become a full-time blogger, first at MyDD and later at Open Left, soon amended the list to include other key job qualifications to include:
If you don't care about having a social life.
If you don't mind being viciously attacked dozens of times every day.
If you don't have a wide range of interests in life.
If you don't mind paying for your own health insurance.
If you don't like taking vacations.
If a one-bedroom apartment in West Philly is your idea of high living.
I wrote Bloggers on the Bus because I wanted to help tell the story of the rise of the liberal blogosphere. I knew there were interesting characters like Bowers and Digby and John Amato and Glenn Greenwald and scores more, who not only helped revolutionize progressive politics by helping to launch a very influential movement online and in the press (I don't think it's a stretch to suggest liberal bloggers really did define this decade), but I also knew they had rather remarkable behind-the-scenes life stories that ought to be told. And for some reason Howard Kurtz was in no rush to tell them. (I also knew bloggers themselves wouldn't do it; too self-referential an exercise.)
I thought the liberal blogosphere deserved respect and I felt it was important to document its rise. After all, how many dozens of books can you find in a good library about the rise of the Christian Right? And how many can you find about the rise of the liberal blogosphere?
With Bloggers on the Bus, I used the 2008 White House campaign as the backdrop to tell that story, and to illustrate how the blogosphere and the larger netroots community changed the rules for politics and the press.
I started writing the book as a fan of the liberal blogosphere, and I finished it as a fan. There is much to admire. But there are also lots of thorny questions that we can address. For instance, the lingering ill-will in some corners from the Blog war of 2008 (i.e. Obama vs. Clinton) still hasn't been settled, I don't think.
And then there's the blogosphere's nuanced and complicated relationship with the Obama White House. I certainly get the sense that most bloggers are more than happy to play defense for the WH and fend off the incessant, and nutty, right-wing attacks that began on Inauguration Day. But in terms of policy and agenda, especially hot-button issues like war funding, wiretapping, gay marriage, etc, the blogs definitely have a much more challenging task than they did when they and they readers could simply oppose, vigorously, all things Bush.
Also, there's the issue of money. Or the lack thereof. This is an issue I just didn't have time/space to detail in the book, but the question of economics continues to be problematic. The fact is that despite its enormous growth and new-found influence, the liberal blogosphere is still, for the most part, built on adrenaline and good will. That's a dangerous way to construct a liberal infrastructure. What can be done to make it more permanent?
Perhaps thee most important thing was left off Bowers list, A deep abiding sense of absolute pissed-offness and the belief that one day VERY soon, corporations will actually start eating us all.
There is a reason I call Health Insurance Companies SOUL EATING BASTARDS!
June 15, 2009 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope to read your book soon. I also hope you didn't feel too “self-referential” to include your own story. Aside from the impact of Media Matters, I think you have been one of the most insightful and reliable of liberal bloggermen and bloggerwomen. That the blogosphere took off coincidental to the "election" of (possibly) the worst President in history was, I think, one of those fortunate accidents of history.
June 15, 2009 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is there a reason your portrayal of the blog wars of the 2008 campaign is told, for the most part, only from the perspective of Clinton supporters? As I'm sure you are now aware, the PUMAs and other Hillary dead-enders have latched on to your book as proof positive that Obama secured the nomination by encouraging Chris Matthews and anonymous blog commenters to be sexist pigs. Why did you choose to give the appearance of taking sides in such a messy, often incoherent conflict?
June 15, 2009 5:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, I had a quite different reaction both to the Clinton/Obama fights of last spring and summer, and to Eric's retelling of it. I just wonder if Eric has ever been in an internal Party War? What happened last spring didn't surprise me at all -- except that some folk were surprised at the squabble. I've been through the wars between Gene McCarthy and Hubert Humphrey over Vietnam during the 60's and early 70's -- in fact I still read DFL Obits and ID the dead and their friends and family as either Humphrey types, or McCarthy supporters. (One of my own claims to fame involves defeating Jeane Kirkpatrick for a delegate slot during McCarthy's run in 1968 -- a defeat that sent her running toward Republicanism.) Perhaps a little less passionate -- the rejection of standard issue DFL'ers in favor of Paul Wellstone in 1990 still lingers -- saw bits and pieces of that fight last year around the Franken Campaign. In comparison what happened on the net regarding Clinton and Obama was pretty mild.
My guess is that Eric and perhaps many readers have never been involved in or witness to a real knock down drag out Party War -- and they were thus surprised. Hopefully everyone has learned a few realities as a result. In Political Wars someone always wins and someone else loses -- and hard feelings are not at all uncommon. If you get involved because politics is important (it is after all about the power to set an agenda and act on it), you will be on the winning side sometimes, and not on other occassions. No one gives up power voluntarily or for nothing in return -- and progressive political bloggers need to learn to think in these terms, and not take things personally.
June 15, 2009 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've always thought that Progressive Blogging had an immediate "pre-history" at Salon's Table Talk. The Blogger softwear did not yet exist, but Salon had that topics and comment place that actually attracted a good many people who eventually founded blogs, or became regular posters. Table Talk existed during the period of Clinton's impeachment, and the Kosovo war -- prior to the election of 2000, and shut down as a free service just as blog softwear was emerging. It demonstrated many possibilities that were better realized in newer formats, but some of the "new norms" of more recent vintage were demonstrated there, such as "blog-swams" on pending legislation or Senate Debates. I suspect the new possibilities were well demonstrated in the conversation about Joe Coneson and Gene Lyons's book, "The Hunting of the President" and their follow up reportage in Salon columns as Impeachment moved forward. "Move-On" (initially "censure and move-on") literally came about as a result of the resistance to impeachment.
June 15, 2009 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sara your clear understanding of history and our place in it is quite refreshing. I especially like the stuff about intra-party war. Do you remember what happened to McGovern? But to answer the themed question from Eric, one thing we have to remember is that while it's good to have the establishment on our side in most of these fights, we should not be content with just being the establishment gophers. Liberal bloggers should be concerned with refining the policy debate and discussion in sensible terms rather than shouting down the followers of El Rushbo and the other crazies. The President and Dems in congress are all over that with talking points and election plans. The liberal movement should be holding liberals feet to fire or at the very least challenging the framing of certain issues (like healthcare) rather than getting sidetracked with the outdated agendas and tactics from the right wingers.
June 15, 2009 7:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I especially like the stuff about intra-party war. Do you remember what happened to McGovern? But to answer the themed question from Eric, one thing we have to remember is that while it's good to have the establishment on our side in most of these fights, we should not be content with just being the establishment gophers."
Yep, I well remember McGovern. Was one of a committee of three that organized the first meeting for McGovern's possible supporters in the Twin Cities in the fall of 1971. Our Congressperson, Don Fraser, had taken over McGovern's responsibilities as chair of the party reform commission (McGovern-Fraser) and I had been in on the re-write of Minnesota Caucus Rules so as to correspond with Dem Party Reforms. If you were a student of those rule changes, you knew that if we were lucky, those new rules could produce a different kind of candidate and agenda. In fact I would contend one cannot really understand the Obama/Clinton fight of the spring of 2008 without understanding that it was an extension of what Gene McCarthy started -- McGovern advanced, and after a fairly long dry period, Obama mastered to his advantage.
I wouldn't call it really criticism of Eric's book, but I do miss in it a "setting" of the Democratic Party when Blogging became an aspect of Progressive Activism. For instance, I think it equally important that Howard Dean used the net in 2004 in support of his candidacy -- and then the blogosphere responded by figuring out how to use the tools to elect Dean to chair the National Committee in 2005 -- with an entirely new mission for the DNC. (Rebuild decentralized State Parties -- professionalize them with up to date resources.) We still have to see if Progressives can hold on to aspects of that accomplishment, and use newly alive state parties to run winning modern campaigns with clear progressive candidates and content. One of my criticisms of many blogs is that they move too fast -- everything is a one time jump shot borrowed from film. Accomplishments are not built on such flitting about. If you get a toe hold on influence in a State Party, you ought to be about using it clearly for realizing goals.
June 16, 2009 5:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hi Eric -- I'm looking forward to reading your book.
I agree with your read of the liberal blogosphere as significant and important. I do wonder, though, what your take is on some of these bloggers moving into the "mainstream media," and what might be the impact of that?
Ezra Klein, for example, now blogs at WaPo, as does Greg Sargent. Do you see this as part of a larger trend (I would place Ross Douthat in this category, though he isn't a liberal), or rather simply a few exceptions? And how might it play into your question of sustaining the liberal blogosphere (as writing/blogging jobs at WaPo, etc, probably pay more than, you know, blogging for free...)? :-)
While obviously not every blogger is going to get hired by a newspaper or other media outlet, there is at least some evidence of bloggers getting co-opted into the corporate media structure, which I think does at least speak to at least one of the difficulties in sustaining what has been built so far.
June 15, 2009 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
With regards to Obama post-election use of the internet to get his message out I have one piece of advice.
Don't have one of your lieutenants write a mass email starting with "I want to personally thank you Andrew for the valuable advice you have given to me personally (yeah right) throughout the ages" blah blah blah. That is so pre-liberal revolution whatnot phoniness
If you are trying to hit me up for money be straight about it.
The one thing that liberal bloggers detest is phony bullshit.
BTW hawking your book at the cafe is ok but it does constitute tooting your own horn around these parts. Minor point.
June 15, 2009 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
AS,
come on cut him just a little slack.
June 15, 2009 7:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
BTW hawking your book at the cafe is ok but it does constitute tooting your own horn around these parts. Minor point.
Andrew, the Book Club has been here since the cafe opened. Authors are invited to discuss their books with others, pro and con, and the newer the book the better. Please look at the list of people who will be discussing Mr. Boehlert's book. They are the top bloggers and the very people he is writing about. Are they all here to toot their own horns. I don't think so, and Eric Boehlert doesn't strike me as that kind anyway. Minor point but wrong, I believe. I look forward to a very good discussion (Sara has already added some interesting political history for framing the debate).
June 15, 2009 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is true. I was wrong. It is good to have the blogging Gemeinschaft discuss issues related to our published output. I was out of line. Sorry. In fact from what he says about his book I think it is worth reading. The characterization of the typical Liberal Blogger describes me pretty well . As to the money thing, I have mixed feelings. On the one hand what constitutes the fatal poison of the MSM is that it is beholden to financial interests and thus it inevitably falls into the trap (conscious/unconscious) of selectively reporting/discussing as well as presenting that cognitive prison that I call "The MSM Consensus" (TMSMC) which amounts to an ongoing ad hoc official versions of events that is more varnished than what a health republic requires.
Recently we have seen the phenomenon of having two official versions: the right wing and the left leaning distortionists.
June 15, 2009 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
that should be "healthy Republic" and I forgot to complete my thought with "on the other hand". The "on the other hand" would be that eventually money will have to play a role in some way. However recall that Plato had the Guardian Class pretty much in poverty living a Spartan life so as not to be corrupted by hedonic greed.
June 15, 2009 10:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Classy. Kudos.
June 15, 2009 10:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great points (and I actually remembered the meaning of "Geimenschaft" -after I went to the dictionary). Several bloggers have gone to higher paying gigs and by and large have retained their credibility and that activist drive; others not so much. Many (Greenwald, half the Counterpunch regulars, etc.) support their full time blogging with the mostly online sales of their books, which not only allows them independence but provides a whole other outlet (and audience in some cases) for their views. And what Bwak said.
June 15, 2009 11:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Matt Stoller knew his shit -- no wonder they whisked him away. Sad loss for us.
June 15, 2009 9:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
The liberal blogosphere is dying. For one thing, it has become is phenomenally boring. Most days, there is barely anything worth checking in on. It's mostly a vast wasteland of redundant, self-perpetuating, homogenized and aesthetically unappealing junk, now cluttered with the same revolting commercial garbage and canned pseudo-thinking that helped turn people away from the old media, a constant assault to the senses and the intellect.
It's also becoming more difficult to find independent, thoughtful, well-informed and original voices. There are some old standbys whose work remains worthy of respect, people like Greenwald and Cole. But most everyone else seems either to have checked out, or cashed in to buy a ticket on the establishment stupidity train. Where is the vital new blood?
Or maybe those independent and provocative voices are out there, but I just don't know where to find them. All I do find is endless, intellectually stagnant repetition of the same well-rehearsed opinions .. over and over and over.
Or maybe it's just me. Maybe I'm just terminally bored with America. ... Or terminally repulsed by it. Maybe I'm just too screwed up. It's a definite possibility.
I do know that something happened to me between the election and inauguration, as the economic meltdown was hitting its peak: a feeling of hopelessness and exasperation, followed by numbed fatigue, as though American society has reached the historical point where its institutions are now cemented in place, and has proven itself utterly incapable of further social and cultural innovation, or intellectual dynamism ... even under the most extreme conditions. There is a lot of superficially clever yet routinized processing of information, in the light of ossified categories of thought. But there is no profound or innovative thought. At least not in the "liberal blogosphere". The old media sources are on the whole much better now .. which is very sad to say. It made me feel and think, "Well that's it. I give up."
The blogosphere used to be an invigorating escape from the vapidity, anti-intellectualism and conformism of the mass American landscape. Now it just feels like part of that landscape. Quite depressing.
I appreciate the thinking of a few lonely commentators who append their words to the posts on other people's blogs. But they are finding less and less that is worth commenting on.
Anyway, where the liberal blogosphere is concerned, here's one guy who's voting for blowing the whole thing up and starting from scratch.
June 15, 2009 10:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I used to like the blogosphere, until it sold out."
This kind of stuff parodies itself.
June 16, 2009 8:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Check out Ari's post!
June 16, 2009 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
especially hot-button issues like war funding, wiretapping, gay marriage, etc,
I don't get why climate change almost never makes the short list. If there was ever something for the self-declared "reality based community" to be concerned about, this is it. A ruined climate, for all practical purposes, doesn't go away. Good luck growing crops in Kansas in a permanent 90 degree growing season.
June 16, 2009 12:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Because Climate change is ballony. Get it !
David Letterman was exposed what lots of folks thought was just fine:
Calling a Governor a farm animal and laughing.
Watching the some Governor linched on a front porch in West Hollywood.
With weekly news of children being kidnapped, raped and killed Mr. Letterman thinks this is humor ? ! ?
That is it, it is over, you are exposed..
Even the Ladies on " The View " are on the Governors side
June 16, 2009 12:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
This Crooked Timber post from last year was written with people like "water.boarder" in mind:
http://crookedtimber.org/2008/01/25/we-have-seen-the-enemy-and-it-isnt-us/
June 16, 2009 12:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Also, there's the issue of money. Or the lack thereof. This is an issue I just didn't have time/space to detail in the book, but the question of economics continues to be problematic. The fact is that despite its enormous growth and new-found influence, the liberal blogosphere is still, for the most part, built on adrenaline and good will. That's a dangerous way to construct a liberal infrastructure. What can be done to make it more permanent?
Surely the dirty little not-so-secret is that the deeply corrupt Democratic establishment doesn't give a fuck about the liberal blogosphere, and buys into every establishment cliche about DFHs in their pyjamas. I hear many bloggers complaining that the Dem establishment won't give them advertising dollars, even while they often exhort the bloggers to help them out against RW media machine.
Even after many years in the wilderness, the Democrats still appear to be too arrogant and ossified to understand and appreciate how the game is played today and what is at stake. With global warming and a collapsing financial system fundamentally changing the rules of the game, they are still stuck in the 1990s, happily whoring themselves out to their paymasters on Wall Street.
June 16, 2009 8:49 AM | Reply | Permalink