I’ve just realised an oversight in relation to the end of my last post (Learning in the open). It’s a bit of a paraphrase, but I concluded that blogging was an activity that I primarily do ‘for me’. In that moment, I probably alienated my ‘audience’ – potentially made readers feel as if they were being nosey reading my posts!
In those final paragraphs, there was something I overlooked. If blogging is something I do ‘for me’, then why am I interested in the number of people who have read each blog and the number who ‘Like’ it. Furthermore, why is it so pleasing when I realise others have republished the material more widely (within the terms of the creative commons license, of course). And why am I so pleased when someone takes the time to comment.
The point is that ‘for me’ doesn’t take place in isolation. It’s interdependent with ‘for us’ and ‘for them’ because it is enhanced by feedback. I like to know if my ideas have reached other people. I like to know if they have found them helpful because I assume that I am not alone in thinking the way I think. And I like receiving comments/feedback because that can then open up another reflective space for me.
So ‘for me’, ‘for us’ and ‘for them’ and not mutually excusive routes – that choosing one negates the other. They coexist and depend on each other. Although online, asynchronous communication may not be the most speedy way of achieving feedback, it is one of them.
PS this isn’t a request for likes and comments, it’s just a train of thought I wanted to get down!