Early adopters, meet the pragmatist packs

Doug makes a useful point that there is a model of blogging very attached to the idea of personal identity and more democratic access to the power of the getting the message out. This is the model that leads to blogs as either serious publishing outlets for op-ed sorts of pieces or for journals at a distance that convey a sometimes mistaken sense of anonymity. But it seems to me that when you look at the print publishing world, you see newspapers like The Nation, The New York Times, or 'zines -- and these are almost always the product of a group of people working around a common theme.

I'd argue that group blogging is the way of the future.

You might argue that the group nature of traditional print media is a function of its economics. Distribution has marginal cost greater than zero. However, publishing in groups also provides validation of what you do publish, since more than a lone ranter is standing behind it.

There is also something different about who has been blogging and who will join (if they do). Later adopters different kinds of people than the technology early adopter "visionary" types who pride themselves on their expertise and forward-lookingness. most people don't feel like they have something so uniquely important to say that people will care enough to read about them and just about them. This is vaguely based on the same reasoning put forth by Geoff Moore in "Crossing the Chasm," but for a business book it actually makes sense. ;)

There are enough people who do that blogging in its current "personal publishing" form that it has become a fairly widespread phenomenon, but I think community organizing -- and the support and validation it provides -- is far more likely than soapboxing or publishing your personal diary.