The Absolute Truth About Blogging

It has been a while since I pondered romantically about this eejit's errand we call Blogging. As I have said on a number of occasions, I cannot claim any level of expertise, only a modicum of experience. 

Fellow-bloggette Anita Mathias was concerned during the summer that the material we write on a given day is there once and oft forgotten. That was my concern once to - and frankly, why you lot don't print this stuff off and paste it to your walls escapes me - after all, am I not the blogging answer to perfect infallibility? No.

It is a concern though. We write and sometimes our pearls are shiny - and there is a worry that something half decent might be buried in the soft silt of Mad Priest's last battle with the Established Church. However, as I think I mentioned, I am a pragmatic type of bloke - so I went searching through the statistics to see what you delightful people have looked at in the last 28 days. 

I have written less than a dozen posts in that time, none of which is probably the fodder of the pearl mountain   - so one would reasonably assume that dying of boredom, you scarpered and left me to it. But no. I have a friend, and on this occasion it isn't Jayzuss. It is Google and all things SEO (search engine optimization, if you please). 

In the last 28 days, 246 of my past posts have been accessed and read (which is to say that someone remained on the page for more than 20 seconds, and therefore not simply peeling the picture off). They weren't just the 246 most recent ones either, but taken from across this body of written bilge that I presume to publish. The list of 'top posts' also conveys a list of posts most visited in the same period - and they come from a broad reach of time. Actually, that they are often older posts speaks poorly of current quality, but that is another matter entirely. 

The moral of the story then is this. If people are looking for it, they will find it. The internet is quite unlike a book insofar as when a page is turned the previous one is hidden from view in perpetuity. No - the alarming truth is that once it is written, it can never be unwritten and can be searched out. That is why, brothers and sisters, I have opted not to re-post posts. Why trouble you a second time?

Facebook and Google+

Once it was Imhotep and Brendan Fraser. Once, it was Ali G and Michael Gambon. Once, it was Lesley and The Welsh Bishop. Now we have a new Head-to-head of global proportions:

Facebook v. Google+

In simple terms, if you are simple, Google+ is like Facebook, only not Facebook because only Facebook is like Facebook and Google+ like Google+. That said, there are striking similarities between Facebook and Google+ which would give rise to you thinking that Facebook was Google+ and that Google+ was in fact Facebook. Once, the market was monopolised by Facebook, but now it sees a mighty challenger - Google+

Get it? Good. 

Some of you may be wondering what the fuss is all about, that surely 'Google' is Ancient Patagonian for Yahweh, hence its presence in just about everything - but no, Google+ is yet another facet in the social meejya scrum which will now mean that I have even less time for my neglected wife and children. I already need two hands to count fellow bloggists who, this day, have frittered a whole day on getting to know the new technological toy. I have dabbled as I lunched, I admit. So far, it feels a little like the same pub but with a new name over the door. Same beer, same seats, same Jukebox - except you can yap to your mates on webcam love-ins and share You Tube clips. And why wouldn't you? 

It's all jolly, and a bit of fun. The serious side of my frontal lobe does worry that this is yet another step in the Googlisation of Plant Earth which to the ether-world is like the Tescofication of all shops here in Britain. There are many criticisms of Facebook as there are with any successful venture, but I wonder if the world needed a replacement held in the hands of The Great Artificer. We will see. 

I now know, though, in absolutely clear and informed terms, what will save the Church of England from itself ...

...Google. The Church of England must be about the only institution that Google neither owns nor emulates (though Google+ is nearly +Google of the Internet). It is only a matter of time, mark my words

http://gplus.to/FrDavidCloake by the way