Thoughts On The Association Of Bloggers (Singapore): Where They Went Wrong
Monday, January 26th, 2009Last week, we saw the launch of the Association of Bloggers (Singapore) (ABS). The reception has been mixed. Some expressed concern, to sarcastic, to cynical and analytical.
Of course, some of us took the opportunity to poke some fun at a controversial issue, and I’m not above having a laugh either.
Now that the hype has subsided a little bit, I have my own opinion on why the news of the ABS seems generally badly received by the Singaporean blogosphere. Do note that I’m writing my personal interpretation of the communication or non-communication of the ABS, and I don’t claim to be reporting the truth.
The problem with the introduction of the ABS is simple: The issue was communicated to the external audience before what is arguably the more important, if not critical, internal “stakeholders”, in other words, the “constituents” that the ABS is supposed to cater to: the bloggers.
Because the news was broken in the mainstream media, it does read to me like the ABS was concerned about getting their message out in “proper” channels (where the audience may or may not care), instead of the blogosphere (where the audience cares, a lot). As a result, now they are not scrambling to communicate their message to their primary target audience, but is it too late?
Whether the bloggers reacted with shock, surprise, or ridicule, I believe they did so because this was sprung on them in the exact opposite way a Web2.0 association should have been introduced: from the ground up. A form of “structure” or “authority” may have been introduced, but not in the way the crowd desires (whether or not they even want such a structure is up for debate).
There are other minor issues like the vagueness and lack of communication of the benefits of joining the ABS, the lack of street credibility (note that the ABS has “formal” credibility as they are officially registered, but I don’t think the local blogosphere is treating that as a critical factor), and not addressing the question that is on the mind of many: is this an extension of the 2008 saga? The strategic inclusion/appointment of the founders sure lead some bloggers to think so, but we have yet to hear from the ABS themselves.
The point here is not whether anyone believes them, but that they be transparent and deal with the issue, or the blogosphere will not let go. Unbranded Bread n Butter tackles this issue in particular, and doesn’t hesitate to remind us that the “fiasco” of 2008 is extensively chronicled online.
I also feel all warm and cosy inside knowing that the dispute mediator is a scorned former founder of ping.sg who was complaining about being left out of the “in-group”, didn’t receive ping award, stirred up a big fuss, left in a huff and puff and decided to form his own little own group. “Take that Ping.sg!” It’s all nicely catalogued here.
Will the ABS overcome a bad start and begin to win people over? I hope the more controversial members of the committee do not make the critical mistake of reacting the same way they did in previous controversies, by lashing out. It’s naive for them to believe the blogosphere would have welcomed such an association with open arms without garnering support beforehand, because particularly in this medium, acceptance and trust is earned, not taken as a given.
Tags: abs, association of bloggers singapore, blogosphere, mainstream media, primary target audience, singaporean blogosphere, stakeholder communication, street cred, street credibility, structure in the blogosphere, web2.0
