This year at the National Communication Association at least two divisions at the conference have blog papers on the prestigious “top paper panel.” I know this because I wrote them. There could be more top papers - there certainly are plenty of papers about the impact and uses of blogs here - but I just haven’t found them yet (it is hard to search for topics in the program).
I say this not to toot my horn (though it certainly might seem that way) but to provide a status report on the state of blog research. I still get some reviews of my work back from journals saying they don’t understand why someone would research blogs. This exposure of blog research in the top paper panels is huge because it signals that not only can there be quality research about blogs - but also that blogs are worth researching.
I wouldn’t call blogs my life’s work - although it has been the focus of much of my work thus far - but I imagine that my interest in communication technology will continue to find me in this position of proclaiming why the next “big thing” is worth researching & examining how it is different from everything else we have known to that point.
Just as blogs are starting to get this hat tip from the academy, the mainstream press seems to have ended its love affair with blogs in that there are more “scare” stories out there talking about the *dangers* of blogs. Take the front page article in Forbes the November 14, 2005 issue (thanks to Jon Lundberg for pointing it out to me). The title, “Attack of the Blogs,” and the image of a muscular Arnold-like arm coming out of a computer screen to beat up a business man sums up the concept of the article. One pull quote refers to bloggers as “a bunch of sickos” who did “obscene and vile stuff.”
So, to me, it seems appropriate that the academy has endorsed this line of research because it now appears there is much more to examine in regards to the impact of blogs on society, personal communication, & the media.