Iain Dale wants your votes for political blog of the year. I’d be very amused if nobody at all voted, but there’s little chance of that, and I’d probably be more amused if lots of liberal and leftie blogs made it into his charts. Vote Mortimer! Of course, for your vote to be eligible, it has to be for a blog that’s already on the TP blogroll. You can submit blogs to the blogroll here.
Pee Zed Tee, meanwhile, has reviewed La Dale’s Total Politics magazine, and found it high on gloss, but light on meaningful content, and slightly parochial. How Cameronesque…
Political Betting deconstruct the idea that Gordon is better off than John Major was at a comparable point in the parliament.
Rhythmaning reviews Channel 4’s documentary on The Qu’ran.
Adrian Sanders MP has news and comment on the MP’s expenses saga.
James Grieves indulges in some churchly point-and-laugh at Scribo Ergo Sum.
6. Anonymous votes left in the comments will not count. You must give a name
I have just given up any hope in this poll. If readers of a high-profile Tory blog are voting via his comments, rather than everyone via email, that will skew it massively.
Re. Pee Zed Tee
He isn’t suggesting that the TP team are just bloggers and media tarts playing at being writers and journos, is he?
I typed out the start of a list but didn’t bother posting it once I noticed Blaney’s Blarney and Melanie Phillips had got votes already. I kind of figure there’s no point there, but consider my very important opinion here to be the equivalent of a spoiled ballot:
Crooked Timber
Septicisle/Obsolete
D^2 Digest
Stumbling and Mumbling
Ministry of Truth
LC
Chickyog
badscience (it counts: Goldacre was the first, as far as I am aware, to send Nadine Dorries back to school, after all)
politicalbetting (though not the comments)
spEak You’re bRanes (it counts, because I say so)
Aaron, yes, I worry that some people will vote in comments AND by email and they won’t catch it, but if you want to subvert things then you have to play the system rather than bitch about the system.
Dan, why don’t you email your list in? Can’t hurt, might help. I’ve sent mine.
Also, Re: Aaron @ 2: You might very well think that; I couldn’t possibly comment [/fu]
I voted for tygerland Aaron. And LC. And Pickled Politics, Sunny. And I emailed my list in! When do we get the result?
Given that the closing date is in August I suspect that it will be after then. There are some hardy buggers who actually read La Dale’s blog; doubtless they will let us know.
@Dan: Speak You’re Branes isn’t a political blog, and it’s not in the Total Politics directory. Neither are Badscience or Crooked Timber, probably for the same reason.
QT: Speak Your Branes is TOTALLY a political blog.
But yeah, I shall make an edit to the post.
Post edited. Also, am utterly stunned that they didn’t already have Ros Scott on there and I had to submit her. A prominent member of the House of Lords has her own blog and it’s not on a blogroll for so-called “Total Politics”? Non-partisan my arse.
You can suggest additions to the Total Politics directory here.
One of my favourite female bloggers, Clairwil, wasn’t in the directory either. Submitted.
Yeah, I submitted a big load of blogs this morning. Of course, there’s no guarantee that they’ll actually be accepted, which just shows this up for the establishment back-slapping execrise that it actually IS, but one can but try…
I’m writing something on this, hence the crossing out above.
Sunny’s baby, Sunny’s rules
* shrug *
While I support Sunny’s right to run this place however he wants, I think that crossing out is just as prominent an example of bad etiquette as the one he lambastes Iain. Especially given that the comments show that Jennie wasn’t informed before it happened but through a “conversation” in the comments.
Of course I should have informed Jennie before this went up, but how should I be dealing with this? If I take off the link entirely, that’s bad form. If I leave it up there, then I’m saying we shouldn’t support the comp, while, erm, supporting it. What would have been the right way to proceed?
Sunny:19 >What would have been the right way to proceed?
I think the biggest problem is that it is just crossed out without explanation in the post itself and that it is replicated to the front page under the DAILY BLOG REVIEW banner.
A reader has to scroll through the comments to see why it has happened.
At least the explanation as to why it is crossed out should be right underneath, with a link to your subsequent post to make it clear what has happened and why.
Or leave the body of the blog review as it is, it is clearly bylined to indicated who’s opinion it is and you could put your objection in an editors note at the bottom again pointing people at your piece on the subject.
It is very easy for us the commenting public to pick holes from afar when we would love to have the sort of readership you guys get, so thank you for asking the question.
“Point and laugh”?
Not exactly.
And Sunny: WTF? Just leave it up without the annoyance of a strike-through and let people read two things on the same topic. I’m sure that they’ll cope.
I’m sure people can cope with reading two different opinions on a multi-author blog. And her opinion isn’t significantly different from yours- she does say that she would be amused if nobody voted. Subverting it with liberal and lefty blogs doesn’t sound like she’s supporting the competition does it? When PZ Myers points his minions to the latest stupidly phrased religious-based poll does that mean he supports the motives of their makers?
Jennie, Ros Scott’s blog was already in the directory. I will be adding all the blogs you submitted.
Iain
Iain, thanks. I searched for “Ros Scott” and got no results, and hence assumed that she wasn’t there. Must have just been a burp from the search engine.
It’s because her blog is called Because Baronesses are people too, and doesn’t have Ros Scott in the title!
25 Comments || Add your own