Thursday, May 17, 2007

Quo Vadis All-Blogs?

My posting Embracing bloggers - Disgracing bloggers posted this morning in malaysiakini’s blog corner, seems to have raised a lot of hackles. Bloody loose cannon KTemoc ;-)

But regrettably some bloggers missed the entire point in their inability to differentiate between the voice and/or pronouncement of the individual blogger against those of the proposed blogger alliance known as all-blog.

As I stated:
Now, this is not to say that the individual blogger may not have political affiliation. Indeed, it would be an anathema to the principle of freedom of expression to curb any blogger from supporting a party through his/her blog.

That, I believe, has been quite straightforward and unambiguous.

Yet I still read of pontificating arguments on one’s right to be affiliated with whoever, or neutrality is incompatible with free speech, or that news media themselves have proclivities.

Those arguments are non-arguments, as they are totally irrelevant in the light of my stated position on freedom of expression for the individual bloggers, but worse, served only to obfuscate the issue under debate.

My point on the all-blog visit to Anwar Ibrahim was that, for an apolitical organisation, it was ill conceived to make such a controversial visit. Are we saying we don’t know who Anwar Ibrahim is?

If it's about engagement, then let's engage with an authority who wants to curtail our freedom, and convince them not to do so; but instead the all-blogs committee paid a visit to their bête noire. Brilliant!

Please don’t forget that when the two leading lights of the all-blogs were harassed by certain parties, most of us had come out to support them unequivocally. By that association we are already party to their subsequent formation of all-blogs. Additionally, the alliance has the unfortunate moniker of ‘all-blogs’, implying that we have been complicit in the visit to Anwar Ibrahim.

Whether we like Anwar Ibrahim is totally irrelevant, but when an organisation, purportedly representing us one way (by virtue of our support of the two leaders) or another (by its title of all-blogs) ventured on an unexpected political visit, we have the right to query ‘what’s going on?’

Are we to be denied that right?

And those who aren’t happy that we raised the question should stop suggesting that it's all about us not liking Anwar Ibrahim or even tossing in totally irrelevant hypothetical arguments like what if the all-blogs pro-tem committee had met up with Mahathir or Abdullah Badawi.

Instead we need to ask:
what’s the purpose, function and organisational objective of the all-blogs? Is it to be a political lobby?

If so, tell us and those who don’t like it can be allowed to get off the train. Don’t deny us this fundamental right of choice.

If not for the title of 'all-blogs', many of us couldn’t give a rat’s posterior if the pro-tem committee had gone to visit Ehud Olmert or Robert Mugabe.


  1. Dear Brother,

    I applaud your stand and affirm I am with you on this.

    Why beat around the bush about the 'I don't give a rat's ass' about it?

    It sounds better when expressed as it should be! :D

    KTemoc is not known to be a wimp when questioned by his adversaries.

    Don't start now.

  2. to say all-blogs has no agenda is naive, all-blogs has agendas(2) there are:
    1.Promote blogging
    2. Protect bloggers
    its implementations and activities are still in discussion. all-blogs welcomes everyone, whether you're apolitical or political. we're basicaly bloggers who, because of our diverse background and profession, come together and utilise our strengths to achieve the two goals mentioned above. all-blogs are built around these personalities(Jeff and Rocky) because of the common solidarity shared by majority of bloggers who sympathises and realised there's a need for us put a 'face' on a united stand for bloggers. Example: the recent injuctice remark by Kunan on 8000 women bloggers who a 'unemployed' or the gender degrading by the uncouthed MPs.

    Think of all-blogs as common stand for bloggers who thinks they're misrepresented by MSM and decides they want to make their voices heard. Like you've said, every blogger has their own individualistic attributes and all-blogs is not going to change that. infact, i've met bloggers in all-blogs who're known supporters from BOTH sides of opposition and ruling coalition who set aside their political beliefs and engage in constructive discussions(in person-lah) and they seem to have a lot more in common than differences. Social and Political awareness are related, for instance, NIAMAH! blog by Patrick Teoh, who likes all to think he's just a normal family guy who wants his local council to do its essential and maybe a little more. thru all-blogs, he might finds out he's not the only bloke having the same thoughts, so all-blogs could serve as a collective to turn our little 'Napoloens' around and tell them straight, "Look if you don't do your job, your sh*t gonne be all over the ehem~ blogs". nvm the msm. when we can 'do something', it's to blog about it.

    all-blogs does not care about your religion, race and the colour of your skin. all-blogs is about us, staking it together on doing what we love doing: blog.

  3. dayum,
    can i get an award for writing THAT?

  4. mob matey, you just made a blogging motherhood statement, which obviously wasn't the issue.

    The question was: what were the intentions of the pro-tem committee in visting Anwer Ibrahim? Why him? Why him first?

  5. Maybe the kuihs are good or there was an invite but again only a few from pro-tem committee went for the meet. The audience were a mixed crowd of bloggers who got to know about it and went along.

    As for the why him? Me thinks 'accesibilty' maybe a key contributor. Bedol is busy selling durians and I don't think all-blogs could afford the alleged 150k 'pre-appointment & processing' fees by the 4th floor boys. kekeke

  6. KUIH - what! no one told me about it - I'd have come along too ;-)