Here's Loren's "beach-side" e-mail press release:
Greetings from New England. Yes, I too am at the beach. But I'm still working, and the purpose of this brief is to tell you about a new project that the Lexington Institute has launched while you were away. It is a defense blog. Yes, yes, I know -- there are already hundreds of defense blogs, and many of them are pretty awful. But that's why we launched our own blog on the Lexington homepage, called Early Warning. It isn't awful. In fact, I'm betting that if you read a few entries, at some point you'll say -- "Gee, I didn't know that."
We all recognize what the main problem is with blogs. The barriers to entry are so low that almost anyone with a laptop can start one, and it's hard to sort out the good ones from tendentious nonsense. For every interesting, competent effort like DoD Buzz, there are dozens of ill-mannered rants masquerading as insight. To say that blogs have lowered the standards of public discourse on policy matters is an under-statement -- there are no standards. Anybody can say anything, with extra points for verbosity.
We are trying a different approach. First, we intend to keep our postings brief. It will be a rare day indeed that a posting on Early Warning runs as long as this brief, and the typical posting will run to two or three paragraphs. Second, we plan to be long on facts -- especially little known, useful facts -- and short on opinions. I mean really, why should you care what I think about the Bradley infantry fighting vehicle or V-22 tiltrotor unless I have inside information to impart? And third, we intend to write about national security in a somewhat more expansive manner than most military analysts. We will frequently look beyond the realm of strategy and tactics, to dissect economic trends, political developments and technology breakthroughs that have a material bearing on national security.
Obviously, we do not expect this vision of a world-class web-log to spring spontaneously from the collective consciousness of the Lexington braintrust onto the Internet. It will take some time to get the blog right, including all the material that surrounds it at www.lexingtoninstitute.org. The blog has actually been up and running for over two weeks, and we are still tweaking features such as how the postings display and are written. But we think we're off to a good start, and are already getting indications that people in the defense community have noticed.
We want Early Warning to be an island of sanity in the chaos of the Worldwide Web. With so many traditional news outlets declining and no new hierarchy of credible sources yet emerged, we'd like to offer a site that is both sensible and engaging. We will never match the resources of the New York Times or the reach of the Associated Press. But we hope that when you read something on the Lexington blog and say, "Gee, I didn't know that," it will be because the information is new and not because it is wrong.
Update:
Defense Industry Consultant Launches Blog, Insults Bloggers - War is Boring
Phib, why did you start blogg'n? - CDR Salamander
Who died and made you king? - USNI Blog
Early Warning—The Pretend Blog - ELP Defense Blog
Comments
<i>I think that subtly insulting the rest of the blogosphere while simultaneously hyping your own blog is either a.) foolish or b.) the most brilliantly thought-out marketing campaign ever.</i>
If you bet b, you would be wrong.
<i>I mean, I bet you all clicked on the link, right?</i>
Wrong question. I created a link to my blog posting a reply to this post on SWJ. If creating links is your network strategy, then be advised there are much more effective strategies.
Agree with Mark, Schmedlap, et al.
Blogs by their nature are raw; but that is also the value of them. Like any other form of media and discourse they require and independent and thoughtful mind to make your way through them. There does tend to be lots of chaff on blogs, but also lots of worthwhile insights too. I treat reading blogs in a way like I do primary source historical research. In that sense there is an "un-filtered" quality to them that is quite appealing and compelling.
David Axe of War is Boring <a href="http://warisboring.com/?p=2482">weighs in on the new Lexington Institute Blog</a>.
Seriously, I do wish them the best of luck in their blogging endeavors, but I think that by posting a diatribe against bloggers, they might have turned off a key portion of their intended audience.
Blogging may be the ultimate meritocracy. Okay, so taken as a whole, the level of discourse is low. Well, I'm not sure if anyone ever noticed, but the level of discourse outside of the blogosphere isn't all that high brow either. Ever watch CNN, MSNBC, or FOX? Ever listen to talk radio? Ever overhear a conversation on the subway or at a restaurant? Good grief.
Starting with the baseline of television, radio, and everyday conversation, how can anyone assert that any medium has lowered the level of discourse? Before discussions moved to the internet, people argued and debated with little fear of being called out as incorrect, deceptive, or otherwise full of crap. Now if someone makes an incorrect statement online, any commenter can find a source to refute it, post that source, and the readers can judge for themselves.
Just because there are lots of lousy blogs, that doesn't say anything about the value of the good ones. Good ones soon rise to the top. Examples: SWJ, Michael Totten, Registan, etc. Those are not blogs that were launched by major organizations and relied upon an existing brand name for their success. Those were blogs that rose on their own merits. I would assert that the mediocre blogs tend to be those that are launched by large organizations that rest upon their branding, rather than upon their own merits. I like the WSJ, but would anyone read the blogs on that site if they did not have "wsj" in the URL? I doubt it. Their readership is almost entirely due to the brand and location on the net, with little if any readership being due to the actual content.
I think Lexington is being smart about this, even if they do come off as a tad bit condescending. They have recognized that just launching a blog and resting upon your branding is not enough. You need to offer something of substance if it is to be influential, rather than just some big name that becomes an obligatory entry on a blogroll.
<i>We all recognize what the main problem is with blogs. The barriers to entry are so low that almost anyone with a laptop can start one, and it's hard to sort out the good ones from tendentious nonsense.</i>
Nice intro - should we just call you the Terrell Owens of defense blogs while we're at it?
- SJS
"<i>We are trying a different approach.</i>
No commenting - why would we? We are <i>the collective consciousness of the Lexington braintrust</i>
What else is necessary?
It's obvious <i>that blogs have lowered the standards of public discourse on policy matters is an under-statement -- there are no standards.</i>
Except for us, the <i>different kind of defense blog</i> [which is actually a very 90's weblog] ... who bring to to table a shockingly new concept in blogging...<i>we intend to keep our postings <b>brief</b></i>
And the best is yet to come as we are long on facts and short on opinion...$50 adjectives and phrases: <i>pretty awful, tendentious nonsense, ill-mannered rants masquerading as insight, island of sanity."</i>
"<i>"Gee, I didn't know that," it will be because the information is new and not because it is wrong</i>"
Neener, neener: SWJ, Information Dissemination, Naval Institute, Blackfive, Abu Maquwama...