dr faust of the singaporean blogosphere

it appears that a certain full-time singaporean blogger has just posted a podcast ostensibly as an explanation and public apology in response to some controversial remarks she made about the physically handicapped on her blog a couple of days back.

this is actually very intersting considering that this isn't the first time (and certainly not the last) she received flak for posting controversial remarks on her blog. and through it all, never once had she departed from her usual defiant stance at defending her own freedom of expression like this time and much less, to issue a public apology. nevermind the fact that by discussing what 'i-think-people-should-do' or delving into the intricate details on 'how-many-years-i-had-spent-using-public-toilets-without-seeing-a-handicapped-person-using a-handicapped-cubicle', her explanation was at best weak, if not downright incoherent. Even she admitted on her podcast saying that:

'...i dun like to account to anyone, and the age old argument of this is my blog and i write what i want kinda thing. but i know that my blog has reached that kind of extent where i cannot afford to do that anymore cos' of the amount of reach it has and the amount of influence it can have over other people so i would like to apologise...'

It just leaves us wondering what could conceivably render the feisty maverick blogger to be unable to 'afford to do that anymore'.

Considering how the formerly-feisty-blogger could 'afford' to blog full-time largely becos' she actually earns her sole income from the various commercial endorsements she does on her blog, it is not difficult to put two and two together that the public apology was in most likelihood made in order to placate the advertisers who see feisty blogger's increasing unpopularity as a bane to their products which are under her endorsement. it's not even about the nebulous ideal of 'protecting my own freedom of expression' anyone. it's about corporate realism. in exchange for her income, feisty blogger has consequently relinquished the 'freedom of expression' which she previously held so dear.

i remember reading this rather insightful comment somewhere in the wake of the 'seditious blogger' incident. In discussing about the differences between the conventional media and blogs, the writer states that the greatest comparative advantage bloggers have over journalists in gandering mass appeal lies in the fact that bloggers are not shackled by the obsession with commercial interests which journalists faces and is thus more predisposed in writing creatively. if what a blogger writes is boring or offensive (but within the limits of law), all he/she faces is just a dearth of readership. big deal. but if what a journalist writes is either too boring or remotely offensive, he/she faces the possibility of losing his/her job. the media business is after all, a business first and foremost. the writer then argues that it is precisely this constraint that prevents journalists from writing more creatively and instead prompting them to choose the pragmatic way of churning out pages of 'tested-and-proven' job-security-safe' articles.

it appears that feisty blogger has committed herself to that very faux pas. those who followed her blog long enough could certainly remember the good old days when her entries were more interesting and had a greater personal touch when she wrote about stuff like 'how she screwed up her life' or exposing the picture and email of a guy who try solicit sex from her.

yet, boring or offensive or what not, a blog in its purest form is nothing but a diary hosted online and a decision to read someone else's thoughts online is quite simply an informed choice the reader makes. caveat lector. no one stumples on a particular blog 'accidentally' without really making a concerted effort to search for it. if some blogders could just go easy on in their witchhunt for errant bloggers. it is even more ridiculous when you actually see people setting up hate blogs churning out unorignal posts with the sole aim of disparaging certain bloggers.

but then again, isn't that mudslinging and controversy that makes our blogosphere so much more interesting than our placcid mandatory daily read? on second thoughts, i would probably rather stick to watching the showdowns =)