Emperor Misha (Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler) on the Blogosphere

Posted on November 4, 2009

You are considered a leader in the conservative blogosphere. How do you feel leadership qualities are essential in making a difference in the political blogosphere?

Leader? Mheh. Never thought of myself as such. I just do what I do and well, if others follow my lead occasionally, then that’s great. On leadership qualities in general vis-à-vis the political blogosphere, I do believe that it helps, at least as far as a willingness to get out in front of an issue and let yourself be heard. It’s easy to fall in with the side you agree with once a consensus has developed, but a consensus will never develop unless somebody is willing to jump out and make a claim in the first place. And in that respect, other bloggers are far more active and deserving of credit than I. But yes, it’s important that somebody stakes out a claim. You don’t want an issue to become an issue after it’s become a non-issue.

Did you intend to become a leader, or did it come naturally? How much responsibility comes with this role, and how serious do you take the role?

I can certainly say that I never had any intentions in that direction. I didn’t even have an idea that it would grow like it did. Honestly, when I started I was just looking for a place to rant, somewhere to put down my unrestrained opinions, but I didn’t really expect anybody other than maybe a few wandering by to be even remotely interested. If anybody had suggested that the site would end up with a readership in the thousands, I would have laughed at them. So no, there was no ambition whatsoever involved in my creating a site. It was actually only because a few fellow commenters at another site suggested that I do so and I reluctantly had to admit that I liked the idea. And the rest is history. I guess it’s just the way I’m wired.

Responsibility? Well, if you DO acquire a readership that trusts you and your opinions, then you DO have a responsibility, in my opinion. Not just to yourself, after all you don’t want to make an ass of yourself and especially not when it turns out that somebody is “listening” (or reading, more accurately), but more importantly to the readers that have come to trust you and your honesty and integrity. Obviously, everybody should remain critical of anything they read, no matter who writes it, but it’s also a fact of life that, over time, you come to trust some people more than others and, as a result, you’re more likely to take what they say at face value because they’ve always been truthful and on the money in the past. Some might say that that’s not your “fault” if somebody trusts you “too much” and therefore accepts a half-assed statement of yours without doing the fact-checking, but I disagree. *Technically* you’re not responsible for somebody believing you too readily, but morally and ethically you are, if you ask me. I mean, if I were to put up a post leading to a massive protest against somebody innocent based on poorly vetted information on my part, then I sure as Hell would feel partly responsible. And deeply ashamed for having made an ass of myself and, more importantly, made an ass of people who have come to trust my judgment. So yes, that responsibility should lead you to be more careful with what you put up there. Of course, nobody’s perfect, I know I’m not, so every once in a while you’ll post with your foot in your mouth, so to speak, and that’s where it’s important that you come out and own it while accepting the justified criticism.

Bottom line: If you want people to trust you, then you’ve got to earn it and you’ve got to take that trust, when earned, seriously.

Of course, with MY readers, who are a highly skeptical bunch, bless ‘em all, I’m in no big danger of anybody taking anything I write too seriously without checking it first. I like it that way.

How has the blogosphere changed for the better since you first began? Do you consider yourself a pioneer?

The blogosphere was already there when I started. Only barely, which is why I consider myself one of the “Old Guard”, but it was there. I wouldn’t call myself a pioneer, though, even though I got in well before the pool turned into an ocean. Has it changed for the better? Yes and no. Yes because more speech is always a good thing. People need to put their opinions out there instead of keeping them to themselves where they don’t do anybody any good. Not to mention that a lot of people keep their opinions to themselves because they’re not sure that anybody, or enough somebodies, feel the same way. That’s not true, as I learned myself. I honestly never dreamed that there were that many pissed off people who were sick and tired of being “politically correct” out there, people who believe, think, speak and feel like I do. That encouraged me and, from what I hear, encouraged others, a lot of them readers of mine, to go out there and make themselves heard too. I think the expansion of the blogosphere, indeed the whole online networking aspect of it, is very much responsible for the fact that we’re even *having* Tea Parties today. People are tuning in, people are learning that they’re not alone and people are learning that they, too, have a voice that not only needs to be heard, but that there are others more than happy to listen.

How has it changed for the worse?

On the other hand, the massive expansion of the blogosphere has meant that it is much more difficult for a newcomer to make a name for him or herself. If you have a burning desire to make a name for yourself online, it’s a steep hill to climb nowadays. But it’s not impossible. We see new names popping up all the time, it’s just that the bar is higher. So if your primary goal is to establish a huge site and really make waves, then you’ve got your work cut out for you. But if you’re just, like I was, looking for a place to rant that you can call your own, then it’s the same as ever. The upside is: If you truly do stand out, if you’re really bringing something new to the table, then you’ll make it. But it’s much harder to make that splash now than it used to be.

What changes for the better and worse do you see in the near future for blogs?

If you’d asked me that question 7 years ago I’d have been wrong then too, so why not be wrong today? I could never in my wildest dreams have imagined that the blogosphere would become such an engine behind forming popular opinion and movements or, for that matter, being successful in areas where the main stream media have failed. If you’d told me that one day the blogosphere would be instrumental in bringing down administration officials, for instance, I would have told you that you had to have been smoking something illegal in all 50 states. But if you want my two cents, I see it growing stronger. It’s already a well known fact that more and more people are getting their news and opinion from the ‘sphere with every passing year. And I don’t see people getting less informed as a result, as some Eeyores of the past have suggested. Don’t underestimate the intelligence of the average American, is what I always say, and don’t underestimate their ability to adapt to an ever bigger load of information. People haven’t become less critical as a result of the mass of highly opinionated news they can get from the ‘sphere. Quite to the contrary, if you ask me. The problem in the past was that almost everybody only had one source of information, and that was the “accepted wisdom” of the main stream media monopoly. Now they have ready access to numerous different opinions, takes and interpretations of the same news item. And when people hear two diametrically opposed views on an issue, the natural reaction is “both of them can’t be right”, which spurs critical thinking. That’s a good thing, and I only see that getting stronger as the ‘sphere becomes stronger.

The only thing better than free speech is more free speech. It *forces* people to think for themselves because there isn’t any longer a cookie cutter “conventional wisdom” beamed into your skull every night on the news. You have to pick sides now.

Also, we’re seeing media biggies realizing that there’s something to tap into there and giving us a bigger bullhorn as a result. Glenn Beck is a perfect example. The media is realizing that there’s something going on and that works for both us and them. That too is going to grow.

The downside, as some might say, is that with the growth of the number of people having a public opinion, the message is going to get watered down and confused. I’m not too sure about that, however. Again, I think people are too smart for that. They know how to sort the wheat from the chaff. What’s important is that everybody gets a say. If they’re good, if they contribute, they’ll float. If not, they’ll find another outlet and somebody else will take their place.

Right vs. Left, who is faring better in the blogosphere and why?

Currently, the Right is doing better as far as getting things going and making a difference is concerned. Getting people out for the Tea Parties was a huge success for the Right, doing the vetting that the MSM won’t do of Obama’s administration is another huge success. Why? Well, the obviously disastrous policies of Obama’s administration is the most glaringly obvious factor. It’s a lot easier to get people to pay attention to you when they can see that you’re right just by looking around themselves. It’s not hard to get the public ear about idiotic policies when the public is getting laid off to the tune of hundreds of thousands of people a month. It’s not hard to get people to pay attention to the argument that nationalized healthcare is a bad idea when you have hundreds of examples of failures from the rest of the world with not one success story. It’s not hard to gain traction for the opinion that the current administration are screwing up royally on foreign policy when all of our allies AND enemies are laughing at us. In other words: it’s not hard to gain the ear of the public when the evidence supports everything you say.

The other factor, and that helped the Left a lot from 2001 to 2008, is that it’s easier to mobilize people who are the underdogs. When your point of view is not the one being shared in Washington DC, then it’s a lot easier to get yourself out of your chair and doing something. Being ignored makes you angry. The Left got what they wanted, Democrat control of both the White House and Congress. It’s harder for *them* to get their troops mobilized with that as a fact. What would be the rallying cry for them now? We need a Democrat elected G-d as well? Fire all of our elected representatives? Help a Republican win the White House? It’s always easier to get people out of their chairs when they’re in opposition.

It’s been said, conservative blogs seem to fare better when a liberal is in power? Have you seen this since Obama got elected?

See the above.

There seems to be a split in the conservative and moderate side of the Republican party. What are your predictions on the direction this will ultimately go?

I honestly don’t know. There are two possibilities: Either the “moderate side”, actually the “elitist establishment side”, prevails and the GOP sinks and becomes a third party, or they reform and get back to what made them different from the Democrats. The latter will mean that we’ll get back on track quicker since it will take time to build a party that can take over from the GOP, so obviously I prefer that solution. And signs are promising. The NY-23 race is a good sign, for one. It looks like conservatives ARE willing to make the “favored candidate” lose rather than elect a RINO and, no matter what the outcome, the message will be clear. If Hoffman wins, then the RINO wing are soundly defeated. If he doesn’t and the Democrat wins (Scozzofava is a dead horse now), then the message is the same: We want somebody who represents us. We don’t want to have to choose between two liberals and if that means losing an election, then so be it.

That’s the only direction that will bring this country back on track, and I speak from personal experience. Once you allow incrementalism because it’s “not as bad as the other side”, then you’ve basically conceded the fight. You’ll lose just the same, it’ll only take a bit longer.

In the conservative blogosphere, do you see cliques that have developed? If so, can you expound a bit?

Cliques? Well yes, but I don’t take it all that seriously. Birds of a feather flock together and you tend to network more with people that you know. That doesn’t mean that you don’t like the other ones, it just means that you tend to read their sites a lot more frequently and, as a result, link or read them more often. I’m as guilty as anyone. Being of the “Old Guard” I tend to read blogs from that group more often because I always have. They were there when I started, after all. But that doesn’t mean that I ignore new ones or “gang up” with “the boys” just because. I’ll happily pick a fight with one of the Old Guard if I think they’re wrong and I’ll just as happily side with a new guy or gal if they think the same. If I’m made aware of it, that is. So yes, there is sort of a “clique” thing, but it’s not a conscious “us vs. them” issue, it’s just people that have always been on my read list and therefore tend to stay on it.

Are there any new blogs without money backing like breitbart’s that you see potentially becoming a major influence in the future or growing to more success?

Honestly, I can’t come up with an example. But that’s not because they’re not there, it’s because I don’t have as much time as I used to have and because there are so many new blogs now.

Do you see twitter and facebook expanding influence amongst bloggers?

I don’t “get” twitter at all. To me, it’s like blogging without wanting to put any energy into it. But that doesn’t mean that it won’t be important and, as a matter of fact, it might be. I see Facebook as more of a force, really, because of its networking aspect. It’s a way to spread the word to people who just want to hang with their friends and don’t really have an interest in blogging but, then again, Twitter might do the same thing. The bottom line is: the more people talk together, the more they get together with people they don’t necessarily live next door to and who aren’t their immediate family, the greater the likelihood that they’ll get turned on to checking out some sites.

Do you ever see blogs becoming something lucrative or is this only for the very talented and lucky bloggers?

As a business model, no. In a very few cases, maybe, but I wouldn’t quit my day job over it, and I speak as somebody who runs a moderately successful site. It won’t pay the bills. Yes, my readers most certainly *have* helped me (and others) in times of desperate need and I can’t thank them enough for it, but it doesn’t replace a pay check. Granted, I’d *love* to be able to do this for a living, but it’s just not going to happen. The supply of opinion is so huge that the price of it has to approach zero and, in many ways, that’s a *good* thing. It releases you from the obligation to produce output since nobody’s paying for it anyway and it makes it more likely that somebody will actually pay attention because there’s no price of admission. And what you write is not dictated by “what will make a buck” as is the case with old media. “If it bleeds, it leads.”

As a blogger, you have no monetary restraints on what put you there.

If I wanted to be a journalist, I would have taken the hit and slept through three years of journo school.

Do you think influence is one of the main hopes bloggers have in what they are doing? Is it more about venting for some? What percentage of each would you estimate?

I think that the majority of bloggers, like I, are in it to vent. Yes, we’d love for somebody to read it and agree with us, who wouldn’t?, but the main issue is that we want to say it out loud and in public. There might be some who are in it to become movers and shakers but they, if you ask me, ought to get their hands dirty and get in the game instead. And they’d have my support too. Opinion is all very good to get people moving, but you need people in positions where the actual decisions are made to get anything out of the movement.

What advice do you have for other bloggers to become more influential and successful?

Keep doing what you do. If you really want to create a stir, get to work and dig up something that nobody else is talking about. Then do the research to make sure your opinion is solid and spread the word. Be you. Don’t be afraid to stand up in a crowd and don’t be afraid to get booed out. Get your facts and arguments in order before you start shooting your mouth off. And be different. Don’t do something that 600 other bloggers are already doing.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post

» Filed Under Conservatism, Conservatives, Internet, Interview, News

Trackback URL

Comments

One Response to “Emperor Misha (Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler) on the Blogosphere”

kimbal aka radar on November 5th, 2009 5:45 pm

I’ve been blogging for four years and I have often perused AIR (not to be confused with CAIR, thankfully. This post reminded me that I have not gone back to visit him lately and should and will tonight.

It seems that you could work your butt off doing trackbacks and linkfests and so on and get a name for yourself but unless you are driven to be famous and have a lot of talent it will not amount to all that much. Me, I just want to put what I think “The Truth” is out there and see what happens. Maybe a few lives are changed or redirected a bit? Makes for a kind of hobby, albeit with the general annoyances like trolls and sometimes a spammer or two.

Anyway, the world is a better place with StopTheACLU and Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler out there! On a personal note, I really like Rottweilers and detest the ACLU.

Grins! Hi to John and Lobo!