So what about in the blogging realm? Are blogs being streamed into a certain format? I'm not talking about efforts to make all online content conform to common content structures. This is about how we're seeing blogging change.

Much attention is paid to the economics of it.

But what about the technology of it. On BlogHer, mir ponders this:

First of all I read the really intense discussion about "growing a pair" the other day on Blogher.

Then I read the post about Dropping the A-list mentality and the discussion of maybe, women converse and communicate in a different way online.

Then I read Danielles post in which she self-identifies as a negro, and then wonders aloud what audience-impact her choice of descriptor will have.

Finally I read What is technorati anyways? and picked up some ideas about tagging, and popularity.

So what's my point? My point is that i guess I am framing my role here, not just as the editor of book and literary blogs, but as someone who combs through the data and sometimes pulls out important factlets about the words we use. What they are good for, the damage they can do, and the fact that a vocabulary used in a techno-social setting is a very powerful thing indeed.

Then she asks:

I am fascinated by the way colloquial language creates order or disorder on the web, and also how only words that have weight survive. What does that mean for the unpopular tags?

Unlike a library, where books stay in view long after they are relevent, how are tags creating a heirarchies of taxonomic/linguistic power in web content?

How (if we want to), can we subvert a power structure that is based on algorithms and on usage, rather than the real strength behind language, which requires that the reader understand the words (if not the authors) intention, and the context the word is being used in?

Some interesting things to ponder here.