http://wordlily.com/2008/08/22/blogs-saving-books-a-conversation-part-1/ For the love of language (and some fiber arts, too) Wed, 15 Feb 2012 05:18:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ http://wordlily.com/2008/08/22/blogs-saving-books-a-conversation-part-1/#comment-1751 Fri, 22 Aug 2008 22:03:26 +0000 http://wordlily.wordpress.com/?p=390#comment-1751 [...] This is, as the title states, part 3 of this discussion. If you haven’t kept up, please see part 1 and part 2 before reading this installment. This part consists of a review of the bloggers’ [...]

]]> http://wordlily.com/2008/08/22/blogs-saving-books-a-conversation-part-1/#comment-1750 Fri, 22 Aug 2008 22:02:19 +0000 http://wordlily.wordpress.com/?p=390#comment-1750 [...] This is, as the title states, part 2 of this discussion. If you haven’t kept up, please see part 1 here before reading this installment. This part consists of a review of Lissa Warren’s column that [...]

]]> http://wordlily.com/2008/08/22/blogs-saving-books-a-conversation-part-1/#comment-1749 Fri, 22 Aug 2008 21:54:01 +0000 http://wordlily.wordpress.com/?p=390#comment-1749 I’m definitely interested in reading parts 2 and 3! I’ll reserve any comments until then. Though I agree with pNielson.

]]> http://wordlily.com/2008/08/22/blogs-saving-books-a-conversation-part-1/#comment-1745 Fri, 22 Aug 2008 19:53:42 +0000 http://wordlily.wordpress.com/?p=390#comment-1745 I can understand Wasserman’s point that people working for papers have training and a certain vested interested others don’t, but he sounds like the old guard. Perhaps he needs to consider that the nature of journalism is changing (in the limited quote from the conversation you posted in this installment he doesn’t seem to realize this might be the case) because of the internet. That’s not necessarily a bad thing; just because the future of journalism looks different than the last 100 years doesn’t negate the practice or profession, eh?

]]>