Sun 15 Oct 2006
Having collected some data, so far, from EC blog sites, I thought it was time to start organising some posts made with a view to compiling an overview of discourses made by EC bloggers on different topics. There has been some previous research on typologies, or taxonomies, on religious internet sites. But I’ve found them to be unhelpful.
E. Johanna Hartelius (2005). “A Content-Based Taxonomy of Blogs and the Formation of a Virtual Community”. Kaleidoscope: A graduate journal of qualitative communication research. 4: 71-91.
The title sounds really promising, but I’ve found the ground of research limited. Hartelius posits that blogs fall into three categories: (1) group blogs, (2) personal blogs made for professional or semi-professional purposes, and (3) personal blogs. Hartelius’s main argument is that group blogs, i.e. single sites with contributions by a number of blog authors, genertes the most social capital, or perception of virtual community, while personal blogs allow for little social capital to happen. Category three, where people blog about their own personal experiences and reflections, have the least power to generate an online community, since bloggers can have little idea of who their audience is. So group blogs only, generally speaking, foster virtual community, and not personal blogs.
I’m finding this to be untrue in the sample before me. While some blogs in the sample may be seen as professional or semi-professional, most are deeply personal. Yet I believe I can show evidence (after the interviews and the completion of the sample period) that EC bloggers are aware of their audience, not just by the comments posted by some (and a small percentage of) readers, but by the trackback comments that are made across each blog.
Hartelius’s category of group blogs should be sub-divided. Group blogs could mean single sites with multiple bloggers, but it could also mean multiple sites with single site authors. It appears to me that the perception of virtual community is clear and present among EC bloggers, not just in their comment threads, but in the acknowledgement of readers across the sites.
Karaflogka, A. (2002). “Religious Discourse and Cybersace”. Religion. 32: 279-291.
This article is mainly a “have-a-look-at-this-and-what-about-this-and-oooh-this-is-different” kinda overview of religion online. It doesn’t scratch the surface much into how religious discourse is shaped by cyberspace. It also seeks to create a typology of different static sites, not blogs, let alone discussion in blogs. Being at least 4 years old now, we know that research into religion online has moved away from identifying sites and making boxes to fit them into. So I hoped that Karaflogka would go a little deeper, but the most she could say was the boxes will never make sense, as the Internet is always changing.
If anyone knows of anyone who’s tried anything to develop a typology of blog posts/discussions, please recommend them to me, otherwise I’m doing this on my own.
My first try is this, for EC bloggers in my sample:
- Posts about faith practices, e.g. liturgies, prayers, dance, tai chi, etc, divided between posts about indidivual faith practices, and discussions about communal practices (e.g. worship)
- Discussions about God, Jesus and Spirit
- Posts about the Bible, incl. authority of Scripture
- Posts about Christian understandings of justice
- Posts on Christian missions, involving evangelism and church marketing
- Posts about being “emerging”, or “postmodern”
- And, using Driscoll’s labels, discussions around Church 1.0 and Church 2.0, including discussions about modern structures and debates on authority, doing theology, role of the ordained, etc.
Technorati: Karaflogka, Hartelius, Blog taxonomy
October 15th, 2006 at 16:23
I’d be interested in a survey on tagging and category usage. Are the categories and tags used by bloggers to describe their sites: a) helpful, b) accurate (given a set of definitions you’d provide, c) common across blog and, d) imposed by a single authority in a shared blog?
I’ve basically given up using tags to access peoples blogs because the granularity isn’t there. Classifying something as “emergent church” might be a general category but a sub-category of “emergent church – ecclesiology” or “emergent church – gender” would be more helpful at times.
What do the names and categories that “emergent” bloggers use tell us about those bloggers and their communities?
And somewhere recently I’ve seen some cluster graphs that have analyzed religous blogs and grouped themes. Can’t remember where though.
October 16th, 2006 at 09:05
I’m doing a little sorting right now of bloggers’ post by their own categories/tags to see if they promote certain ideals/values in each. There are some tags used that are common to some blogs. A significant number of blogs in the sample are powered by blogger and don’t have category functions. Some blggers place technorati tag-lonks under each post, and so far there are too many to sort right now.
So your question: “What do the names and categories that “emergent” bloggers use tell us about those bloggers and the communities?” is also an important question of mine.
But you’ll have to give me to time say anything about it. Might have something for you in February (that’s my goal, anyway).
October 17th, 2006 at 08:03
I also disagree with Hartelius – he is ignoring the role of the commenters, I think. They give you some idea of who your audience is, over time. To some extent you can guess – ask yourself who would read what you write and come back time after time. And then there are the people who email you about posts.
Group blogs aren’t the same thing as personal blogs at all. In a personal blog the blogger speaks from their own place – s/he has chosen the colours, images, etc and the site functions as an expression of identity. Group blogs may be a meeting place,
Professional blogs are a different thing again. They have a subtext of the promotion of some ‘official’ message.
October 21st, 2006 at 02:03
Fascinating study. Would like to see the results once you are half-way there. The initial categorization is great.
There is one site (OST) where 1-6 frequently get covered with quite a bit of interaction all the way from evangelical to ec to nonchristian.
there are a few (like mine) that I have run into where it’s an almost secular take…
October 21st, 2006 at 10:15
Hey samlcarr,
Your blog is brilliant. Especially love your stuff on US govt – fuels my disdain!
October 24th, 2006 at 03:58
Being an Indian gives me the licence to say things that would probably have the FBI out in force were I in America!
Still, I think many of my American friends find it downright unfriendly though that is not the intention.
I liked “Resident Evil”, very thought provoking eeven for an unartsy person like me, so how about an update?
October 24th, 2006 at 09:36
An update, you mean on the religious identity in horror movies research?