If Blogs Are Free, Does That Make Them Worthless? Another Contribution. Thank you.

My recent post, encouraging contributions to the Wild Wild East Dailies kicked up a discussion over at RCNevada's "My View Of The World" on the order of whether a blog is a real product and whether people should pay money for them. RC's comments go like this:

The basic argument comes down to the fact that the person chose to write a blog that isn’t instructional or designed to sell a product so it’s nothing more than a fancy soapbox. You don’t give money to the guy on the street ranting about the end of the world do you?

Valid, but according to that argument if you ignore the ads, the Sunday paper is nothing more than a bunch of nut cases standing on soapboxes ranting about the end of the world, and you pay for that don’t you?

So it seems that the decision of whether or not one contributes to blog writers is based on value. Is it valuable to you? Whilst providing a service or selling a product on the web has become all too commonplace, would it be so far fetched to suggest that a blog, as an entertainment vehicle, is a product in itself? I think not so far fetched at all - but as opposed to newspapers and magazines, most blogs (at least the good ones) are not supported by advertising, and I personally have been very selective in the ads I take. I'd much rather not take any and keep it a reader supported endeavor. My regular posting diet is good for three stories a week and I try to keep it varied with everything from travelogue, to comedy to personal reflection and sometimes politics, so if these things are interesting to you if you're a regular subscriber or you come back frequently to check the goings on at WWED, please do consider a contribution. It really does help.

All that said, we recieved another contribution today in the amount of $100 and we thank that reader warmly - and as the snow begins to fall here in Bavaria, that means a lot!