Scott Baradell at Media Orchard has a great response to Forbes' recent Attack of the Blogs article (use BugMeNot to bypass registration). The Forbes article has caused something of a maelstrom in the blogosphere, but Baradell takes a practical look at the information and tone of the article.
1. Forbes focused on the sliver for good reason. What reason, you ask? An avalanche of news articles have already been written about blogs -- including covers by Fortune and other financial/business magazines. Forbes is a latecomer. Rather than simply offer a journalistic "me too," writer Dan Lyons sought a fresh story angle that would generate some buzz. He succeeded.
2. Bloggers are perturbed because, even though the story is factually accurate, it focuses on a negative aspect of blogging. They are worried about being unfairly lumped in with blogging's "evil-doers," to borrow a term from CNBC host Dylan Ratigan (who borrowed it from someone else we know.)
Together, these points beg a question:
If an avalanche of stories have been written about blogs, why do bloggers need to worry about one story that focuses on the negatives?
My answer is: They don't.