Counterblogging

Slate has a regular media review for blogs entitled, simply enough, Todays Blogs. The article that is up now is about political bloggers talking to people of different political persuasions.

The quick summary: Cass Sunstein argued that the internet would decrease dialogue between people of different views because they could simply go to whatever site (or blog) they wanted to get news and opinion that confirmed their already held beliefs. Apparently, there is a new study out that tends to disconfirm that hypothesis, and does so by measuring the number of times that a political blogger links to a blog of a different ideology.

What I found interesting was the critique of the study. According to Slate's article, a professor of political science thinks the study does not accurately reflect the quality of the interactions that people have when they read a political blog.

And the article suggests that it would be more impressive to study how often liberals post comments on conservative blogs.

I find that an interesting challenge. I often just read 'liberal' sources like TPM, New Donkey, the NY Times, etc. And I often don't spend time on conservative sources like Foxnews, etc.

So, I picked a conservative blog off the list of blogs in the study cited by Slate and decided to see what would come of it if I started posting there. I chose Blogs for Bush I have already commented several times on the top few posts they have. The first comment I have is on the post entitled "Conservative Ideas." So no need to look below that.