As a newbie still trying to get all my techno-terms down correctly, this comment sent me surfing over to Wikipedia to see the community definition of “blog”. Accordingly to the highly credentialed folks there, I think you you’ve introduced a value-specific qualification about what blogs are, and perhaps in fact are talking a bit more specifically about open invite collaborative blogs. I bring this up because I agree with you that there are HUGE differences between the potential value of a message delivered via an open invite collaborative blog and other forms of information distribution, including other types of blogs.

But perhaps we’re tackling the wrong question anyway. If we are to achieve the goal you mention of engaging the community in discourse, I think the question is not why association executives don’t READ blogs, but rather why association don’t executives RESPOND to blogs.

I had two comments on your post, Jeff:

You say that you’re pushing back “on the notion that it is somehow wrong for us to question why our colleagues are not actively reading and engaging with the material we develop for them.” To be honest, I don’t think this is what Mike (or any of the other thoughtful bloggers discussing this subject) are doing. I think they’re trying to find answers to the question you’re asking. Why aren’t more association executives reading blogs? If we can diagnose (as much as it’s possible in a collective sense) the problem, it’s much easier to find an effective solution.

Second, you vigorously defend the “soapboxy” nature of blogs–and I think you’re right to do so. But perhaps association blogs, which are generally passionate in a positive way, are being incorrectly grouped with blogs that are vitriolic in a negative way.

I remember when I first proposed a blog at my last association, another manager turned to me and said, “Aren’t blogs those things that aren’t fact-checked and just publish all kinds of crazy untrue stuff?”

Perhaps one thing we need to do is educate the association leaders who aren’t reading blogs, to help them see the difference between a passionate blog and a vitriolic one–to let them know it’s safe to come in the water.

Okay, in my defense, perhaps I didn’t fully express myself. What I meant to do was give my own explanation as to why association executives aren’t reading blogs — but I didn’t intend to defend their excuses. They should read, but they don’t.

Jeff in particular and other bloggers shouldn’t apologize for expressing their views — far from it; we’ll always need more good ideas. But the point I was trying to make was that association executives, in my experience, value the kind of third-party validation that comes from (for lack of a better word) traditional media. More than that, they want to be up on what everyone else is talking about. In that regard, it’s kind of a chicken-and-egg argument: Association blogs would have more readers if they were more influential, and if they were more influential they’d have more readers.

Although the techie-bloggers seem to think that blogs have “jumped the shark,” I think the heyday of association blogs is yet to come. Keep up the good work, Jeff!