Information Is Forever

By sheer coincidence, the same day I posted that I wouldn't be blogging about Steph anymore, Emily Bazelon had a similar piece over at Slate (hat-tip to Scott for the link). I had to email Bazelon, because there's one thing I never understand in these debates over whether parents should blog about their kids' personal lives: that argument about how "the Internet is forever." Aren't books forever? Haven't people been writing books about their kids for, well, forever? Bazelon replied, "My point about the Internet is that it's far more accessible, and searchable, than books, or than newspapers etc. used to be." That's a valid point, but I also think the inverse holds true: I believe that there are many bloggers out there who, if approached for a book deal, would want to edit out some of their blog posts before publishing it all in a real, live book that would last forever. As for me, I like to think that there's nothing in my blog that I wouldn't put in a book (well, except for maybe that photo of me with the dorky reading glasses), and vice-versa.

Comments

[califmom]

I have wondered the same about books vs. blogs. Seems to me many a person has written a book or print article about family members. I would be one of those to edit my blog posts prior to converting them to a book. I think the blog as journal makes it seem less formal, more stream of conscious than the purposeful nature of a biography, with editing and revising spanning months or years.