I finally got around to reading the weekend papers, and came across a column by the Globe & Mail's Leah McLaren on how she's giving up the blogosphere. At least, I think she's giving up the blogosphere but it's difficult to tell. On one hand, she complains about how many blogs are nasty, they're "spectacularly boring" and there's too much "unedited noise". Then, she goes on to talk about how some blogs are readable, including one by a friend. So, I'm confused, Leah. Sounds like you're torn but I can understand your dilemma. Yes, the blogosphere is full of noise and lots of crappy, unedited, self-indulgent writing, which makes it difficult to find the "good stuff" (however you want to define that). But there is also plenty of wonderfully  insightful writing that would otherwise never find itself into the mainstream. It's this mix that makes the blogosphere so exciting, frustrating, interesting and, even, boring. While some people are already talking about the blogosphere reaching its zenith, I - and folks like Newsome.org - would argue that things are just getting started. Over time, I believe it will become easier for people to easily discover whatever they consider to be worth reading. But to dismiss the blogosphere or walk away from it is premature. So, Leah, stick around for awhile. With a little patience, I'll sure you find it an interesting place to be. Who knows, you may even feel the urge to write your own blog.
For more thoughts on the blogosphere and who gets to blog, check out Mathew Ingram's spirited post today, which includes a nice comment "war" with Scott Karp. Meanwhile, the Wall St. Journal steps into the fray with a story on the need for a more pragmatic, less "obsessive" approach to the blogosphere.

As the Blackberry teeters on the verge of extinction in the U.S. after yet another legal loss, Alec Saunders has revealed a dirty, little secret about why ARPU-crazed wireless carriers love the Blackberry so they that they're willing to give it away. Saunders just received his monthly bill with a overage charge of $72. Puzzled, he discovered the "unlimited" plan offered to him by Rogers meant unlimited speed, not unlimited data. Sure he should have read the fine print but his experience illustrates a key reason why the love affair between the Blackberry and wireless carriers is so hot and heavy. First, the Blackberry is a cash-cow, and it will become even more lucrative with the launch of new high-speed networks and new Blackberries that finally have a half-decent Web browser. Combining bigger pipes and a better browser gets you more data usage. Now, here's the best part: most Blackberry users - unlike Poor Alec - don't care about much they pay for the service because they their companies pay their wireless bills because it's a business "tool". If the Blackberry bill is $100 or $150 or $200 a month, so be it because it's not coming out of the user's pocket. But if you're a carrier, the Blackberry is the killer tool to jump-start data usage and ARPU because the Blackberry has become such a must-have corporate tool, everyone seems to have stopped looking at their bills. Maybe corporate bean-counters will start seeking cheaper alternatives (Good, Visto?) when the economy slows down and cost-cutting becomes a strategic necessity. Maybe then, they will realize how expensive using a Blackberry can be. While Alec may get little sympathy from Rogers, he make get some measure of satisfaction by signing an online petition against the company and its sneaky 25MB per month data plan.