Very interesting blog!

Cut up and blogged Chris’s conversation with Doc Searls here: http://www.3375537.com/archives/000046.html
::we can fact check your ass at the door::

Chris – please interview a non-blogger.

An open letter to Chris Lydon (posted here as a “comment” and over at my blog.

Yet another great interview with Doc Searls. I learned a lot from the interview even though I got to meet Doc in person at Dave’s Cafe Bombay meet-up after Jupiter’s Business Weblog event. But you have to start interviewing non-bloggers. Up to this point, you’ve been “preaching to the choir” with Winer, Cone, Searls, etc.

May I suggest that you take your BlogRadio portable studio over to the Harvard’s Kennedy School of Management and find out what their thoughts are on blogging, the web and Election 2004. A good start might be Matthew Hindman, a fellow over at KSG, who has gotten a couple of op-ed pieces in the NY Times recently. He wrote a piece entitled How the Web Will Change Campaigns <> back in Dec. 2002 in which he concluded that candidate websites would not be a deciding factor or even a significant factor in election 2004. Given that Dean now leads the Democratic pack in fund raising and his primary fundraising channel is his website, I wonder whether Mr. Hindman has modified his opinion.

If Matthew is in town, you might invite him to the next “Thurs. at Berkman meeting.” We might even try to record the meeting for BlogRadio although I realize this might be a little ambitious at this stage. But, hell, you have to try a group interview at some point, right?

Thanks, Chris for Doc’s interview. His blog serves as a model, at least for me, on how to utilize this agreement/space whatever you want to call, most effectively.

I think blogs are at their weakest, and I’m guilty of this when they try to be predictive and oracular. It’s the hardest thing to pull off, but it stimulates nonetheless.

Without getting too political let me suggest that we begin to look at the US populace online as a resource for finding creative solutions for the current set of problems. Instead of waiting for the “government listening to RSS feeds” we can begin to try to reach a consensus through debate about issues regarding healthcare, resolution in Iraq, homeland security. Don’t you think that the blogosphere can work more efficiently in synthesizing information toward coming up with solutions than the government bureacracy can? Afterall, we’re not burdened by the onslaught of lobbyists, special interest groups or the need to get re-elected.

To a great extent the gov’t should expect its citizens to work to find the solutions, now that they have the tools to network. (Just as newspapers must look to the Web see what people consider newsworthy.)I don’t think it’s so important that political candidates start blogging, but that they realize that the citizenry can share in the role of leadership. We love our heirarchies, they’re simple to comprehend and diagram, but there’s no reason to believe that creative solutions should drop down from the isolated, centralized bodies that are elected every 4 years or so. The blogosphere is a mess and imperfect, but protean, which is it’s real value.