Who we are

I occasionally jump into threads about the impact of blogging or the perennially vague "what a blog(ger) is and is not" and generally have nothing more to say than to remind others that making a distinction between "for-profit press" and "for-a-cause press" is helpful in understanding objectives and results in the brave new media mix.
But today's NYTimes publishes a story on the Pew Internet & American Life Project survey that shores up a few things and blows a way a few things active bloggers [well, this one anyway] on politics tend to think of themselves. I just wonder how they define "A-list bloggers" on whom the MSM presumably lavish some rather anxious, if often dismissive attention. It was NOT the A-listers that were the subject of these findings.

Chris Anderson, the editor in chief of Wired, a magazine about technology and culture, said the Pew report was accurate. "The finding that jumped out at me was the recognition that people are talking about the subjects that matter in their personal lives,"” he said.

Mr. Anderson, the author of the book “The Long Tail: Why the Future of Business Is Selling Less of More” (Hyperion), said that the Pew report shows how the blogosphere is unlike traditional media. “"It's narrow, niche subjects,” he said. It's a granularity of media that we in the commercial media could not scale down to."

Being the world's sloppiest writer, I simply have to mention that the article has a eyebrow-hiking typo you'd never expect to find in a paper of the NY Times reputation.

"By contract, 74 percent of Internet users are white."

should read "By contrast..." Or is the author thinking of Newt's "contract on America"???