Sunday, October 6, 2002 
S.F Chronicle columnist C.W. Nevius write about two editor-free Internet phenomena this Sunday: Google News and Blogs. He takes the heretical position for a writer that editors do in fact add value to writing.
He devotes most of his column inches to Google News but takes on blogs near the end, allowing that blogs "can be very interesting," but characterizing many of them less charitably:
Self-indulgent claptrap would be the kind description. Hundreds and thousands of words about waking up a little late this morning and deciding to have a second cup of coffeeI'm forced to agree. I think the flourishing of uninhibited unedited writing online is a wonderful thing, but as someone whose worn both the writer and the editor hat, I don't think you can overestimate the value of a good editor and I think most good writers realize that.
What these people need is someone with a discerning eye who can say, "Cut this in half. It is nowhere near as amusing and clever as you seem to think it is." ... Editor's do that. They also catch errors, clarify confusing passages and tell writers to start over and take a different approach. ... [W]e will always need good editors.
categories: metablog
3:36:31 PM 
say what []
Well, I never did manage to surpass the blognovel in time, as Reverse Cowgirl rocketed past me into No. 3 position yesterday and went to No. 2 overall today. Scott has a pretty big lead in his No. 1all-time position but if I were him I'd still be nervous! I think it's clear, though, that RevCow is the first huge breakout success we've had here in our little Salon Blogs community, such as it is.
I still have a chance of getting my now-comfortable No. 3 position back in a few days, but with the picky pornographer back on the case, my overall standing in the long run remains in doubt.
3:28:00 PM say what []
