WebProNews

I don’t understand why this is even a question. People want news/any sort of information as fast as possible. Live bogging is another way to get that. I myself enjoy the live coverage and think it’s a great idea. Hate it or love it its not going to go away. Interesting to see what so many people have to say about it though.

Just pulled this issue of WPN out of my spam folder to hear what Bruce Clay had to say.

So I took a few minutes out of my busy day to read the entire issue. Most issues never get clicked on in my Spam folder.

Now I scrolled down and say this headline that captured my attention. Live bloggers?

Why?

Does anyone ever read anything from a live blogger? We don't need the information that quick. I'd take a guess and say that anyone who is waiting on hands and needles for a post from a live blogger has too much time on their hands.

Yeah, I'm sure some people hop from Social Media site to another seeing what has been posted since the last tiem they checked 5 minutes ago. But reality says that most people have way too much to do to sit and wait for some live blogger to post an article.

It makes no difference whether the post is added immediately after a session or 8 hours from the end of the session.

People who sit and wait on a post from a live blogger need something to do.

Don

Get the information from live events straight onto the web must have some benefit in that there is more information available instantly instead of it being stuck in a broadcast or an interpretation of a reporter.

Luxederm's skin beauty cream helps safeguard the skin's elasticity with rich indulgent formulation.Beauty cream products was designed to reduce the appearance of existing stretch marks.Stretch marks beauty cream uses to renew the skin. 

Why do people who don't want something so often feel obliged to rubbish it? It reminds me of hearing Maurice Boland on REM FM radio telling some crotchety old bat, who rang up to complain about some program or other, to inspect her radio carefully and locate the mechanism that would permit her to switch to another radio station or turn the radio off altogether... He was so right!

If nobody ever accesses what you are doing after the initial flurry of visitors, perhaps it isn't worth continuing unless you are OK with speaking into a vacuum but, if your stats tell you that people are returning, any people at all, it doesn't have to be millions, then why shouldn't you be able to go on doing it without those who have nothing better to do with their time trying to direct your activities?

To such people I would say "Get a life!"

The people who complain about live blogging are usually the ones too stupid or lazy to do it themselves or simply have a vested interest in live bloggers not getting any attention.  My wife and I both live blog a lot of televised events from awards shows to sporting events to political speeches and with decent SEO measures in place it does bring instant traffic along with all the benefits of being top ranked on google, google blog search and at times google trends. 

Live blogging can be a profitable endeavour.  My best day ever was last seasons Idol gives back.  I posted every commercial break and sometimes more often than that.  I grew from 50 page specific visitors on the first break to more than a 1000 per break by the end of the show.  I am sure people who waited until it was over to spout their little two hundred word complaint were unhappy with my 15 page keyword filled post which to this day still brings in a hundred plus visitors a month from google.

As for those who would say we are just trying to be celebrities, "Well DUH!" Every blogger no matter what they blog is on or how fresh their material is wants to be a celeb.  That is the nature of the game. Even the losers who complain about us trying to garner all the attention are themselves trying to be celebs, they want to be famous for being haters.  If you find the information useless or go away and read someone else, no one is forcing you to read my soapbox forum.

Lastly, I must ask what is more useless; people giving their instant opinion on a subject with no chance to change what they thought at a particular moment in time or hate filled complaints about people with the audacity to give their thoughts and opinions?

Eric Schmidt of Google said that the Internet is fast becoming a cesspool:

http://www.contentagenda.com/article/CA6603607.html

This is because of the malicious hecklers with nothing constructive to say.

Charles Douglas Wehner

It's kind of a curious question in many respects - obviously for some live blogging would be a useful way to get information and for others, not so much.  Just because we have technology that allows live blogging is no indication that it something that should be done. 

If live blogging offers value to readers which can't be better acheived by some other method of communication then it seems useful to carry on doing it.  If however it is only a technological novelty, it will be crushed by the weight of it's own uselessness and go away.

Everyone is talking about the "conversation" but if they're not listening, then it's not two-way. The "live" blogging cracks me up...it really epitomizes "Blahhhging"

This is so not a real issue. who gives a sh*t?