Christianity- A Reality Show?

Is Christianity a reality show? There is something interesting happening in the UK.

A lap dancer, a lesbian, and a lapsed Christian with a pregnant girlfriend are among the participants on the U.K.'s newest reality show, Make Me a Christian, where Christian leaders attempt to bring a group of unlikely candidates to the faith. The show's premise is to find out if Christianity can help repair the moral fabric of British society.

The volunteers aim to live by the teachings of the Bible for three weeks, guided by the Rev. George Hargreaves, outspoken political activist and leader of the Christian Party, and his team of mentors. The participants take Communion, get their own Bibles, receive lessons on the correct way to view sex, and learn about service in soup kitchens.

read more

Channel 4 has a few clips from the show.
George Hargreaves runs MakeMeAChristian.com for viewers who have become interested in Christianity.

Christianity- A Reality Show?

Is Christianity a reality show? There is something interesting happening in the UK.

A lap dancer, a lesbian, and a lapsed Christian with a pregnant girlfriend are among the participants on the U.K.'s newest reality show, Make Me a Christian, where Christian leaders attempt to bring a group of unlikely candidates to the faith. The show's premise is to find out if Christianity can help repair the moral fabric of British society.

The volunteers aim to live by the teachings of the Bible for three weeks, guided by the Rev. George Hargreaves, outspoken political activist and leader of the Christian Party, and his team of mentors. The participants take Communion, get their own Bibles, receive lessons on the correct way to view sex, and learn about service in soup kitchens.

read more

Channel 4 has a few clips from the show.
George Hargreaves runs MakeMeAChristian.com for viewers who have become interested in Christianity.

New Marketing for Old Church

April 21, 2008
Secular Thoughts on Sacred Marketing
Seth Godin’s advice on spreading your church’s message.
by Chris Blumhofer

StreamingFaith.com recently sat down with marketing guru Seth Godin and asked his advice on church “marketing” in our increasingly plugged-in, techno-driven society. At the forefront of Godin’s thought-world these days is “new marketing”—methods of communicating messages that aren’t top-down (from an ad firm to your TV) but side-to-side (from a bootleg YouTube clip, to your blog, to my blog, to the evening news). New marketing reaches smaller audiences, but it creates more of an impact.

His advice may surprise or offend, but it is still worth thinking about.

Consider these excerpts (you can see the full interview here):

"Churches are the oldest businesses around today. And yes, they’re businesses. They don’t necessarily sell a physical product, and they don’t always charge money, but there’s a transaction nonetheless. And that involves the individual paying attention. Attention is precious and it’s rare and it’s non-refundable…."

"Just because it’s important to you (and it could be your Tupperware product line or your sermon) doesn’t mean it’s important to me. The essential idea here is that new media is selfish and you can’t buy or demand attention, no matter how worthy you believe your idea may be…."

"I'd say you need to concentrate on what's remarkable and interesting and noteworthy and touches my faith, and stop spending time on tasks that don't amplify any of those elements. Doing something because you've always done it isn't an idea worth spreading…."

What do you think? Do we short-change ourselves by taking people’s attention for granted? Do we recognize the selfish way in which people listen to our messages? How can church leaders make the most of insights from the business world?

Check out the full interview on StreamingFaith’s website.

New Marketing for Old Church

April 21, 2008
Secular Thoughts on Sacred Marketing
Seth Godin’s advice on spreading your church’s message.
by Chris Blumhofer

StreamingFaith.com recently sat down with marketing guru Seth Godin and asked his advice on church “marketing” in our increasingly plugged-in, techno-driven society. At the forefront of Godin’s thought-world these days is “new marketing”—methods of communicating messages that aren’t top-down (from an ad firm to your TV) but side-to-side (from a bootleg YouTube clip, to your blog, to my blog, to the evening news). New marketing reaches smaller audiences, but it creates more of an impact.

His advice may surprise or offend, but it is still worth thinking about.

Consider these excerpts (you can see the full interview here):

"Churches are the oldest businesses around today. And yes, they’re businesses. They don’t necessarily sell a physical product, and they don’t always charge money, but there’s a transaction nonetheless. And that involves the individual paying attention. Attention is precious and it’s rare and it’s non-refundable…."

"Just because it’s important to you (and it could be your Tupperware product line or your sermon) doesn’t mean it’s important to me. The essential idea here is that new media is selfish and you can’t buy or demand attention, no matter how worthy you believe your idea may be…."

"I'd say you need to concentrate on what's remarkable and interesting and noteworthy and touches my faith, and stop spending time on tasks that don't amplify any of those elements. Doing something because you've always done it isn't an idea worth spreading…."

What do you think? Do we short-change ourselves by taking people’s attention for granted? Do we recognize the selfish way in which people listen to our messages? How can church leaders make the most of insights from the business world?

Check out the full interview on StreamingFaith’s website.

John Rambo: To Hell and Back

Rambo 4

[Warning: This review contain spoilers]

The situation of Rambo 4 is just not something you want to be in while you are on a mission trip. Seriously! Since Christians are in the resurrection business, we shall examine whether it is possible to resurrect a 20 years old trilogy with a 61 years old actor. John Rambo is a cult figure; on par there with G.I. Joe. Both have wonderful action figures.

Twenty years ago, John Rambo hit the big screen and was an instant hit. Starred by a young and slimmer Sylvester Stallone, it portrayed the homecoming of a Special Forces Vietnam veteran. The first movie was named Rambo: First Blood, based loosely on a novel of the same name by David Morrell. In the movie, John was rough handled by a small town sheriff who mistaken him for a drifter and in retaliation, a small town in the United States was almost blown up and burnt down.

The second movie was Rambo: First Blood Part 2, where a more muscular John was enlisted to find American P.O.W.s in Vietnam and ended in a successful rescue operation.

The third movie was just named Rambo 3 where John blows up a Soviet mountain fortress in Afghanistan. All these movies were violent with gory scenes of killing, maiming, explosion and destruction. However, all three movies highlighted certain groups of oppressed communities. In the first, were the unappreciated Vietnam veterans who fought in a highly unpopular war; in the second, the left behind prisoners of war in Vietnam, and in the third, the oppressed in Afghanistan under the Soviet Union. It is highly ironic that the Americans armed forces have replaced the Soviet forces today.

This movie is about another group of oppressed people, the Karens of Myanmar. The Karens are Christian tribal people and have been at war with the Myanmar military Junta for 60 years, making it the longest civil war in history. There have been reports of atrocities committed by the military that was graphically shown in the movie. It was 20 years after John Rambo left Afghanistan and went to live in Thailand. He was living a quiet retiring life when he was approached by some American missionaries to bring them up river into Myanmar. He reluctantly agreed. The group was captured by the local warlord. John was approached by the church pastor to lead a group of mercenaries to rescue them. This he did with a great deal of noise, explosions and flying body parts. The movie does raise some interesting questions.

First, what is the nature of Christian mission? Does God want his people to travel into volatile and hostile political situations to minister comfort and his word? The American missionaries wanted to bring medicine and food to the Karens. It is interesting to watch in the movie, scenes of them feeding the tribal people, treating their medical conditions and preaching from the Bible. In a way, moving into these unstable situations is asking for trouble. Reports of missionaries killed and recently of the Korean missionaries’ hostage situation highlight these. What is the Christian response? Do we still go, knowing that we will be tortured and killed? And when our missionaries were captured, what should the sending agency’s response? Negotiate, pay the ransom, or send in mercenaries?

Second, the issue of pacifism and ‘just’ war arises in the story. Initially the leader of the missionaries was a pacifist but became a killer after his imprisonment. The violence in the movie is consuming. At the beginning, when the soldiers were committing atrocities on the civilians, we watch with horror. At the second part when the ‘good’ guys started killing the soldiers, we feel satisfied and even gratified. Our sense of justice seems to be fulfilled. In a sense, we even begin to enjoy the violence.

Third, this movie brings to a close the spiritual journey of John Rambo. During the trilogy, John tried to justify his action by blaming the military for making him a ‘killing machine.’ In this movie, he came to realise that he was already a psychopath before the army trained him. This self-realisation brought peace to John Rambo and this movie ended with him reaching his home in the States, a journey he started 3 movies and 20 years ago. It is a journey of self-discovery and sometimes we need to come to terms as to who we are before we can move on.


Finally, the movie asks an important question; is violence ever justifiable? This is a violent movie but it never glorified violence. Violence was used to portray the evil that is in our hearts and our deeds. It was used to show how one community oppresses another.Violence was also used as a means of redemption. Unlike the earlier three movies, I walked away from this one shaken and stirred.

Parental guidance is needed and some scenes were too graphic even for me. You have been warned.


.

John Rambo: To Hell and Back

Rambo 4

[Warning: This review contain spoilers]

The situation of Rambo 4 is just not something you want to be in while you are on a mission trip. Seriously! Since Christians are in the resurrection business, we shall examine whether it is possible to resurrect a 20 years old trilogy with a 61 years old actor. John Rambo is a cult figure; on par there with G.I. Joe. Both have wonderful action figures.

Twenty years ago, John Rambo hit the big screen and was an instant hit. Starred by a young and slimmer Sylvester Stallone, it portrayed the homecoming of a Special Forces Vietnam veteran. The first movie was named Rambo: First Blood, based loosely on a novel of the same name by David Morrell. In the movie, John was rough handled by a small town sheriff who mistaken him for a drifter and in retaliation, a small town in the United States was almost blown up and burnt down.

The second movie was Rambo: First Blood Part 2, where a more muscular John was enlisted to find American P.O.W.s in Vietnam and ended in a successful rescue operation.

The third movie was just named Rambo 3 where John blows up a Soviet mountain fortress in Afghanistan. All these movies were violent with gory scenes of killing, maiming, explosion and destruction. However, all three movies highlighted certain groups of oppressed communities. In the first, were the unappreciated Vietnam veterans who fought in a highly unpopular war; in the second, the left behind prisoners of war in Vietnam, and in the third, the oppressed in Afghanistan under the Soviet Union. It is highly ironic that the Americans armed forces have replaced the Soviet forces today.

This movie is about another group of oppressed people, the Karens of Myanmar. The Karens are Christian tribal people and have been at war with the Myanmar military Junta for 60 years, making it the longest civil war in history. There have been reports of atrocities committed by the military that was graphically shown in the movie. It was 20 years after John Rambo left Afghanistan and went to live in Thailand. He was living a quiet retiring life when he was approached by some American missionaries to bring them up river into Myanmar. He reluctantly agreed. The group was captured by the local warlord. John was approached by the church pastor to lead a group of mercenaries to rescue them. This he did with a great deal of noise, explosions and flying body parts. The movie does raise some interesting questions.

First, what is the nature of Christian mission? Does God want his people to travel into volatile and hostile political situations to minister comfort and his word? The American missionaries wanted to bring medicine and food to the Karens. It is interesting to watch in the movie, scenes of them feeding the tribal people, treating their medical conditions and preaching from the Bible. In a way, moving into these unstable situations is asking for trouble. Reports of missionaries killed and recently of the Korean missionaries’ hostage situation highlight these. What is the Christian response? Do we still go, knowing that we will be tortured and killed? And when our missionaries were captured, what should the sending agency’s response? Negotiate, pay the ransom, or send in mercenaries?

Second, the issue of pacifism and ‘just’ war arises in the story. Initially the leader of the missionaries was a pacifist but became a killer after his imprisonment. The violence in the movie is consuming. At the beginning, when the soldiers were committing atrocities on the civilians, we watch with horror. At the second part when the ‘good’ guys started killing the soldiers, we feel satisfied and even gratified. Our sense of justice seems to be fulfilled. In a sense, we even begin to enjoy the violence.

Third, this movie brings to a close the spiritual journey of John Rambo. During the trilogy, John tried to justify his action by blaming the military for making him a ‘killing machine.’ In this movie, he came to realise that he was already a psychopath before the army trained him. This self-realisation brought peace to John Rambo and this movie ended with him reaching his home in the States, a journey he started 3 movies and 20 years ago. It is a journey of self-discovery and sometimes we need to come to terms as to who we are before we can move on.


Finally, the movie asks an important question; is violence ever justifiable? This is a violent movie but it never glorified violence. Violence was used to portray the evil that is in our hearts and our deeds. It was used to show how one community oppresses another.Violence was also used as a means of redemption. Unlike the earlier three movies, I walked away from this one shaken and stirred.

Parental guidance is needed and some scenes were too graphic even for me. You have been warned.


.

Is Computer Games Bad for Your Kids?

That is a question many parents ask.
Is computer or video games bad for our kids?
Is it bad for their learning?
Will it make them violent and anti social?

Answering the last question first, children becoming violent after spending too much time playing violent computer/video games is a recognised phenomenon. However, there are other contributing factors such as absent or abusive fathers, dysfunctional families, personality disorders, socio-economic factors, and gangsterism. So, there is not a clear yes or no answer.

Is it good for them? Depends. It is now recognised that children who played computer/video games makes better surgeons because of better hand-eye coordination. I know of some trainee surgeons are beginning to play computer/video games to improve their hand-eye coordination. My comment to them is , good try, but you're too old, too late.

Don Norman gave an interesting talk on The Future of Education: Lessons Learned from Video Games and Museum Exhibits at a
COMMENCEMENT ADDRESS, NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF EDUCATION AND SOCIAL POLICY: June 2001

he makes an interesting observation.

Children, we are told, have short attention spans, caused, of course, by the prevalence of games and TV and commercials in our society.

Nonsense.

Watch people at video games. You can't tear them away. More importantly, they truly are exercising their minds. They problem-solve. They take notes, read books of hints and strategy. They save the game state, try out a new course of action, and if it doesn't work, return to the saved game state. And they form social communities, sharing hints, tips, and methods. Many of you will understand, for you do it too.

Times have changed. Game play has become more complex. It can be a good learning experience. Professional organisations are using stimulation games to train their employees. Game theory are used in fields as diverse as economics and the stockmarket. However as parents, we still need to vet through the games we allow our children to play. This means we have to know about computer/video games. Command and Conquer 3, anyone?

.

Is Computer Games Bad for Your Kids?

That is a question many parents ask.
Is computer or video games bad for our kids?
Is it bad for their learning?
Will it make them violent and anti social?

Answering the last question first, children becoming violent after spending too much time playing violent computer/video games is a recognised phenomenon. However, there are other contributing factors such as absent or abusive fathers, dysfunctional families, personality disorders, socio-economic factors, and gangsterism. So, there is not a clear yes or no answer.

Is it good for them? Depends. It is now recognised that children who played computer/video games makes better surgeons because of better hand-eye coordination. I know of some trainee surgeons are beginning to play computer/video games to improve their hand-eye coordination. My comment to them is , good try, but you're too old, too late.

Don Norman gave an interesting talk on The Future of Education: Lessons Learned from Video Games and Museum Exhibits at a
COMMENCEMENT ADDRESS, NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF EDUCATION AND SOCIAL POLICY: June 2001

he makes an interesting observation.

Children, we are told, have short attention spans, caused, of course, by the prevalence of games and TV and commercials in our society.

Nonsense.

Watch people at video games. You can't tear them away. More importantly, they truly are exercising their minds. They problem-solve. They take notes, read books of hints and strategy. They save the game state, try out a new course of action, and if it doesn't work, return to the saved game state. And they form social communities, sharing hints, tips, and methods. Many of you will understand, for you do it too.

Times have changed. Game play has become more complex. It can be a good learning experience. Professional organisations are using stimulation games to train their employees. Game theory are used in fields as diverse as economics and the stockmarket. However as parents, we still need to vet through the games we allow our children to play. This means we have to know about computer/video games. Command and Conquer 3, anyone?

.

A Cure for Down Syndrome

I was approached by a parent in my clinic whose son is suffering from Down Syndrome. He told me that he heard from a friend that there is a new treatment for Down Syndrome using umbilical cord stem cells in Kuala Lumpur. He showed me a business card of a doctor from a company dealing with placenta. According to the father, he has heard of a child with Down Syndrome who has received umbilical cord stem cells, and now has normal intelligence and is attending normal school (Children with Down Syndrome often have subnormal intelligence). This treatment is also successful for children with cerebral palsy.

I told the father that I have not heard of any new treatment in giving umbilical stem cells to Down Syndrome or children with cerebral palsy.

Doing a literature search I managed find two references. One is from a Russian research centre which did a small trial on 125 children with cerebral palsy. However the results were not published in a scientific peer reviewed journal. The second is a brief mention in a US website on stem cell research. Again it did not provide any documentation.

Cord blood stem cell research is still in its infancy and it is unlikely any medical establishment in Kuala Lumpur will be using stem cells therapies without the rest of the world knowing it! This means that whoever is offering the treatment is not a medical professional and is not using medical procedures for his treatment.

My caution is to beware of excessive claims of untested treatment especially in conditions where there is no known treatment. If you are in doubt, consult your own doctor.

A Cure for Down Syndrome

I was approached by a parent in my clinic whose son is suffering from Down Syndrome. He told me that he heard from a friend that there is a new treatment for Down Syndrome using umbilical cord stem cells in Kuala Lumpur. He showed me a business card of a doctor from a company dealing with placenta. According to the father, he has heard of a child with Down Syndrome who has received umbilical cord stem cells, and now has normal intelligence and is attending normal school (Children with Down Syndrome often have subnormal intelligence). This treatment is also successful for children with cerebral palsy.

I told the father that I have not heard of any new treatment in giving umbilical stem cells to Down Syndrome or children with cerebral palsy.

Doing a literature search I managed find two references. One is from a Russian research centre which did a small trial on 125 children with cerebral palsy. However the results were not published in a scientific peer reviewed journal. The second is a brief mention in a US website on stem cell research. Again it did not provide any documentation.

Cord blood stem cell research is still in its infancy and it is unlikely any medical establishment in Kuala Lumpur will be using stem cells therapies without the rest of the world knowing it! This means that whoever is offering the treatment is not a medical professional and is not using medical procedures for his treatment.

My caution is to beware of excessive claims of untested treatment especially in conditions where there is no known treatment. If you are in doubt, consult your own doctor.

21st Century Literacy Summit

A "21st Century Literacy Summit" was hosted by Adobe, the New Media Consortium (NMC) and the George Lucas Educational Foundation (GLEF) in April 2005. This summit provides a framework for the consideration of "new media literacies" in "The New Media Literacies Project", a collaboration of the University of Chicago and MIT.

The older media are oral media, print media (1500), graphic media, and cinema (1900). Nowadays we shall have to consider the e-media and the experiential media.

Kristina Woolsey presented a paper New media Literacies: A Language Revolution in which she postulates that it is a language revolution. She writes,

Digital technologies have created a new environment for human thinking, learning and communication.Many think of this as a media revolution. Me, I think of it as a language revolution. I think that digital technologies have fundamentally changed the nature of the tools available to the human species for thinking and human expression. I believe that they have extended traditional media as we have known them, to create new e-media, and that they have created a new class of immersive experiential media to add to those that we have known in the past. More critically, I think that the context for the interactions and exchange of these media have been altered drastically by digital technologies, creating a very new digital “soup” in which we humans are now exchanging and developing our ideas.

She concludes by stating that to prepare students for the e-media age, they need to

• engaging critical judgement in assessing the wealth of available information,
• using imagery in communications,
• engaging collaborative groups in solving problems,
• assessing information gathered from multiple sources,
• expressing ideas in a range of media,
• choosing media appropriate to tasks,
• thinking in multimodal terms, and
• participating actively in collective intelligence communities.

Susan Marcus, in response to Woolsey's paper presented The New Literacies: What is Basic Education Now? Susan notes

The definition of what the new literacies are all about, what “they” should contain, or how or where to teach “them”, or measure “them” is still under construction. The general agreement from the 21st Century Literacy Summit Report is that while the underlying concepts are “informed by work in media literacy, semiotics, iconography, visual cognition, the arts, and other well-established fields, they emerged so recently that there is not a body of literature or theory in place yet that can provide adequate definitions, taxonomies, or ontologies.”

...the new “language” of imagery (and sound) is another very basic symbol system to learn, utilize, and invent with. And that it is the oldest symbol system of our species, coming long before the other symbol systems of words and numbers that have taken the cherished literacy spotlight today. I will also try to “connect the dots” a bit differently and show how creativity (a higher-order thinking skill) and individuality are central to new literacy thinking and also deserve to be moved up the ladder of priorities of what occupies our children’s time in preparation for their (and our)
future.

Personally I find it exciting to be at the cutting age of a new revolution in our thinking, writing, and communicating.

.

21st Century Literacy Summit

A "21st Century Literacy Summit" was hosted by Adobe, the New Media Consortium (NMC) and the George Lucas Educational Foundation (GLEF) in April 2005. This summit provides a framework for the consideration of "new media literacies" in "The New Media Literacies Project", a collaboration of the University of Chicago and MIT.

The older media are oral media, print media (1500), graphic media, and cinema (1900). Nowadays we shall have to consider the e-media and the experiential media.

Kristina Woolsey presented a paper New media Literacies: A Language Revolution in which she postulates that it is a language revolution. She writes,

Digital technologies have created a new environment for human thinking, learning and communication.Many think of this as a media revolution. Me, I think of it as a language revolution. I think that digital technologies have fundamentally changed the nature of the tools available to the human species for thinking and human expression. I believe that they have extended traditional media as we have known them, to create new e-media, and that they have created a new class of immersive experiential media to add to those that we have known in the past. More critically, I think that the context for the interactions and exchange of these media have been altered drastically by digital technologies, creating a very new digital “soup” in which we humans are now exchanging and developing our ideas.

She concludes by stating that to prepare students for the e-media age, they need to

• engaging critical judgement in assessing the wealth of available information,
• using imagery in communications,
• engaging collaborative groups in solving problems,
• assessing information gathered from multiple sources,
• expressing ideas in a range of media,
• choosing media appropriate to tasks,
• thinking in multimodal terms, and
• participating actively in collective intelligence communities.

Susan Marcus, in response to Woolsey's paper presented The New Literacies: What is Basic Education Now? Susan notes

The definition of what the new literacies are all about, what “they” should contain, or how or where to teach “them”, or measure “them” is still under construction. The general agreement from the 21st Century Literacy Summit Report is that while the underlying concepts are “informed by work in media literacy, semiotics, iconography, visual cognition, the arts, and other well-established fields, they emerged so recently that there is not a body of literature or theory in place yet that can provide adequate definitions, taxonomies, or ontologies.”

...the new “language” of imagery (and sound) is another very basic symbol system to learn, utilize, and invent with. And that it is the oldest symbol system of our species, coming long before the other symbol systems of words and numbers that have taken the cherished literacy spotlight today. I will also try to “connect the dots” a bit differently and show how creativity (a higher-order thinking skill) and individuality are central to new literacy thinking and also deserve to be moved up the ladder of priorities of what occupies our children’s time in preparation for their (and our)
future.

Personally I find it exciting to be at the cutting age of a new revolution in our thinking, writing, and communicating.

.

What have we learnt from blogging?

By the end of this month, I would have being blogging for one year. It has been fun and I met a lot of new people online, people whom I do not even know how they look like. I have shared information, argued, confronted and sometimes ''deleted them. I also have made some friends. I became very up todate with the latest information and happenings around the world. From the numerous links, I have became aware of how much information there is available at a click of a mouse, if you know where and how to find it.

Alan Jacobs comments in his article, Goodbye, Blog in the May/June 2006 issue of Books & Culture: A Christian Review that blogs are " the friend of information but the enemy of thought."

_____________________________________________________

There is no privacy: all conversations are utterly public. The arrogant,
the ignorant, and the bullheaded constantly threaten to drown out the saintly,
and for that matter the merely knowledgeable, or at least overwhelm them with
sheer numbers. And the architecture of the blog (and its associated technologies
like rss), with its constant emphasis on novelty, militates against leisurely
conversations. It is no insult to the recent, but already cherished, institution
of the blogosphere to say that blogs cannot do everything well. Right now, and
for the foreseeable future, the blogosphere is the friend of information but the
enemy of thought.
_______________________________________________________

What Jacobs wrote bears thinking about as we surf the web daily for information to update our blogs for readers we do not know, for information that may not be accurate, for opinions that may not be informed and from people who hide their true identities.

How do we overcome the architecture of the blog to making it conducive to thinking rather than just information presentation? How do we become reflective thinkers rather than information brokers? We need to think about it if our blogging is to become a missional activity rather than an addiction.

Previous Post

Why I Begin Blogging

What have we learnt from blogging?

By the end of this month, I would have being blogging for one year. It has been fun and I met a lot of new people online, people whom I do not even know how they look like. I have shared information, argued, confronted and sometimes ''deleted them. I also have made some friends. I became very up todate with the latest information and happenings around the world. From the numerous links, I have became aware of how much information there is available at a click of a mouse, if you know where and how to find it.

Alan Jacobs comments in his article, Goodbye, Blog in the May/June 2006 issue of Books & Culture: A Christian Review that blogs are " the friend of information but the enemy of thought."

_____________________________________________________

There is no privacy: all conversations are utterly public. The arrogant,
the ignorant, and the bullheaded constantly threaten to drown out the saintly,
and for that matter the merely knowledgeable, or at least overwhelm them with
sheer numbers. And the architecture of the blog (and its associated technologies
like rss), with its constant emphasis on novelty, militates against leisurely
conversations. It is no insult to the recent, but already cherished, institution
of the blogosphere to say that blogs cannot do everything well. Right now, and
for the foreseeable future, the blogosphere is the friend of information but the
enemy of thought.
_______________________________________________________

What Jacobs wrote bears thinking about as we surf the web daily for information to update our blogs for readers we do not know, for information that may not be accurate, for opinions that may not be informed and from people who hide their true identities.

How do we overcome the architecture of the blog to making it conducive to thinking rather than just information presentation? How do we become reflective thinkers rather than information brokers? We need to think about it if our blogging is to become a missional activity rather than an addiction.

Previous Post

Why I Begin Blogging