Michael Feldstein “suggests”:http://www.elearnmag.org/subpage/sub_page.cfm?section=3&list_item=25&page=1 that the tendency of bloggers to link to other bloggers, usually done as a way of crediting them with the idea, tends to smother discussion or debate: “The very same hyper-linking impulse that makes it easy to pass along an idea with a minimum of effort also makes it easy to appear as if I’m agreeing with the post I’ve referenced when, in fact, I’m just deferring to it.”
From an academic perspective I think Cass Sunstein “got there first”:http://bostonreview.mit.edu/BR26.3/sunstein.html (though he was talking about Internet mediated discussion more generally). I know this is one of the things that bothers Habermas about the Internet (I asked him). Shanto Iyengar “disagrees”:http://bostonreview.mit.edu/BR26.3/iyengar.html.
Thanks to Jeremy Wagstaff for the link
Interesting to see the human herd instinct remains no matter (and you’re illustrating the point here, of course).
Comment by Stephen Newton — 28 October 2004 @ 12:27 pm
…errr, should I or shouldn’t I link to this entry? Zeldman might think so, but Eric Meyer may not. I’m going to have to look around and see what others are saying first… 🙂
Comment by Stuart — 29 October 2004 @ 4:34 pm
[…] Ieri, per caso, ho scoperto che c’è chi ha pensato lungo le mie stesse linee e ne ha scritto molto prima di me. Così linkare un altro non diventa più dire “trovo questo interessante”, quanto lo dico anche io, secondo me con un ragionamento dietro che funziona in questo subdolo modo: “se lui è ritenuto bravo e io lo linko verrò visto dagli altri come uno bravo anche io” (la potenza di un simile meccanismo di autocongratulazione è evidente). […]
Pingback by Carlo Amoretti, Blog » Blog Archive » Linkare = consigliare o unirsi al gregge? — 21 April 2006 @ 1:43 pm