Do Not Blog To Be An Expert?

This is what Jakob Nielsen is saying. Or that replace blogging with researched articles, features or whitepapers if you want to demonstrate expertise. I am all for research and whitepapers, but that in itself cannot replace impromptu blog posts. Nor can research be replaced. Why? Because they serve two different needs. Blogging is more about communication and conversation than the research itself. One of the blogs I follow regularly – Lambda the Ultimate – does exactly that, it initiates discussions on a lot of research papers.

The good thing about blogging is that you can use it for your own purpose, without having any strict guidelines. You can use it to start a discussion, contribute to an ongoing conversation, raise an objection, tell the world about good and bad things and even bring about a change. In that sense blogging is more social. In another sense, it is therapeutical because you can choose to write for yourself, for your curiosity and quest. And in another sense it can take any form of communication – from newsletters to bookmarking to presenting researched articles to a daily journal.

From a reader’s perspective, a blog presents a more complete personality of the author. Not because he/she can write personal things, but because the blog also serves as an archive of one’s thoughts across time. And thoughts need not be always refined and researched, raw thoughts provide a lot of value and they contribute a lot to demonstrate your expertise.

Blogging does not have any heavy pre and post duties attached, it minimizes the bar for initiation and participation. All it does is give you unrestricted format of presenting your thoughts, whether they are spurious or researched. I respect Jakob Nielsen and consider him an expert on usability. However I respectfully disagree on this, to an extreme to say that all professionals should blog, or at least try to.