So, I’m now five whole posts in to this blog experiment and I’ve suddenly realised that I am stumbling over a whole host of questions about what I should and should not blog about.
I want this blog to be my blog, to write about things I care for. But I’m also conscious that I have, on occasions, to be careful with how I do that.
Take today for example: I was reading an article on The Stirrer website, suggesting that all the “grunts” at P&M were more concerned about their £300 payout than they were about the sale.
Now, I can’t speak for anyone else but me. But this blog, if anywhere, is where I should be able to respond to something like that.
Several times today I’ve had my finger over the button wanting to let rip about that story and to say that, for me personally, the £300 is not the be all and end all. I understand why Mr Goldberg wrote it, but surely there are more important things to be thinking about here?
But despite feeling passionate about it, I never pressed the publish key (!), because it feels uncomfortable.
Why should that be the case? Well, there are a number of reasons. One I have already mentioned in my previous post. Another is that I don’t want this blog to get involved in pointless political wranglings.
This last reason, I think, leads on to the more pressing fact that I haven’t come to any firm conclusion about what this blog is actually supposed to achieve.
Blogging is so different to writing for a newspaper. For a newspaper you are required to develop a certain style of writing and a knowledge of what is ‘newsworthy’. This provides some structure within which to work.
But with blogging the rules are much more fluid and suddenly everything is up for grabs. I am in the dark and unguided. I think I’m feeling the fear.