Michael Skube’s article is based on the new phenomenon of blogging. Bloggers now happen to be everywhere and it is on rapid increase. People believe that the news produced from blogs are, however, more interesting than that of the official news. Some bloggers are persistent partisans in political debate but, compared to the real national conversation, it’s particularly tiresome opinion. His point of view declares that blogging is tiresome, cranky, never in doubt and skeptical opinion of what the national conversation really turns out to be. Some of these bloggers have all the liberties that a journalist possesses but with few of the obligations. Even though blogging is an efficient transmission of information, it neglects to tell the whole truth about specific news and current events.

Both articles share certain similarities in that they both possess the fact that, blogging has sky rocketed ever since the Internet has become a more potent force in societal interests. These two articles emphasize that blogs have become a more sufficient news source since it invigorates the audience more than the standard news editorials might. But these articles definitely share their differences. Andrew Sullivan states that blogging will bring about a revolution concerning how people percept the news, in the near future. Skube presents the argument that blogging brings about excess skeptics that arise a cranky and a tiresome opinion of what the news actually is. He calls bloggers journalists without the obligations when Sullivan manifests the idea that they are independent writers who purposely write for the sake of the passion. Both of these authors hold similar yet contrasting opinions of what blogging actually curtails. Who holds the better argument? I’m not sure but maybe all this blogging I’ve been up to will soon help me discover its truth.