If it sounds like a goose it must be a duck (bad english is more than bad hair rock).
Why bother with accuracy or definitions? I could *gleam* information from a dictionary and tell you what I *leaned*, but what would be the advantage in that? So many bloggers have a miniscule vocabulary, which they supplement with things they’ve heard (or misheard) or just use a thesaurus to substitute every third word. Because when most of your readers aren’t experts, why would the writer ever try to be? I like to imagine gnomes in some subterrainian lair, desperately trying to piece together words cut together from magazine articles, like some kind of ransom note to my intellect. This results in bizarre disjointed blogs, who have clearly been spell-checked, but not proofread by someone who understands context.
Crosses are more comfortable with padding (play the game without blame).
I’m not sure how people seem to change personalities in between blog posts, and demean other’s problems by creating a simple calculus to address a complex problem (badly). They offer is some anecdotal bullshit, supported by some quote scavenged off of google, and backed up with a link to other blogs in order to increase the connectedness and, in turn, their content stream, which eventually becomes a revenue stream, even though it’s generally a rewording of some other blog. Like a giant game of telephone which begins with an Associated Press story and ends with utter nonsense, but perpetuates until the leaf nodes of this tree are getting no real hits.
One stone of doubt ripples across the pool (Vagrants don’t live in glass houses).
Rather than actually refute something in a reasonable way, just occlude the inconvenient details, and create a nice little microcosm, which can be dismissed by a glib, one line assessment. Cast your reader’s doubt to the wind, creating precedent to which you can later refer. Chances are your reader doesn’t understand the details of the issue at hand, which is why they’re trusting some random person on the internet in the first place… so why hold yourself to any level of accountability or give some disclaimer? Bravely forge ahead like a post-modern Lewis and Clark, but without a compass, map, or natural sense of direction.
Synonyms have spin to them (Reduce. Recycle. Reuse.)
Why write your own material, when the Associated press and other legitimate media outlets do that for you? …instead, make a business of summarizing existing articles, amalgamating them into contrived lists and repeatedly submit that content to high-volume peer-vetted frontpages, so to maximize that minimum of work you inflate it’s natural exposure using cheesy catchphrases and cliches. Sampling works in music, so why not in writing? …without other people’s inspiration what person could possibly have their own? Blogging is a compost heap, so whoever adds the most shit to the pile, wins!
And the lord said ‘let there be add revenue’ (Why shell out, when you can sell out?).
How much money can be squeezed out of all the permutations of a given story?Only google’s adsense knows. You know those blogs you see with 6 panels of advertising, per story? Ever think ‘Wow, what a great idea!’? Well… you too can join the parade of tacky, questionable blogs which monetize your gimmick driven traffic (the previously mentioned ‘news’ frontpages) using a swath of targeted ad blocks which far exceed the visibility of your content. What would a drive down a road be like without billboard after billboard, who could take all that unspoiled scenery? Let’s just plaster money streams everywhere, if *anything* will convince people of the legitimacy of your words, it’s to try and extract a dime while you speak!