Many bloggers serve as "intelligent filters" for their publics by selecting, contextualizing, and presenting links of particular interest for that public. In this context, a "public" differs from an "audience" because you, in your role as a blogger, have in mind when you write a community of peers who not only read but actively respond to what you write, who might act upon your advice, and who might join you in discussion and collective action. The public you choose to address could be a public in the sense of a political public sphere that undergirds democracy -- the communications you engage in with your fellow citizens, with whom you share responsibility for self-governance. The public doesn't have to be political, however. It could be an engaged community of interest -- others who share your profession, avocation, or obsession. When fans begin writing fan fiction or remixing and sharing cultural content, they are acting as a public -- a culture-producing public. AIDS patients organized collective action that influenced research funding and the pharmaceutical industry -- creating an effective public through their discussions about their mutual interest. What interests you -- strongly, even passionately draws your attention? Is there a community that shares your interest? Could you and the others constitute a public? Clearly defining and understanding your public is the necessary first step to developing a public voice -- the voice you use when that public, and your potential to act together, is clearly in mind when you blog.

Erin Reilly, NML's Research Director, points to the following blogs as examples of ones in which the authors leverage 2.0 practices; she describes these blogs as

ones that receive comments, ones where blog posts are circulated by readers, ones where the blogger has commented on other bloggers blogs and linked back to his / her own blog.... A few examples of my favorites right now include:

• Ze Frank's blog... from52to48 -- check out Ze's update on this blog here.
• Style Rookie ; Tavi, a 12-year old fashion blogger -- notice how many comments she gets and google her and see how many other bloggers are linking and connecting with her.On top of that, using teen bloggers as examples could help encourage students to try it themselves.

Interestingly, and I suppose not surprisingly, the blogs like the ones Erin points to seem to be ones whose authors carry the weight of their chosen public--or at least evince an awareness of the line separating audience and public. Serving as intelligent filter is not, of course, the only or even the original purpose of blogs--indeed, if we return to the term "weblog" or consider the blog's fairly humble and diaristic origins, we see that the medium grew in popularity as its participatory affordances were identified and capitalized upon. The blog is still quite commonly used as a form of "public diary"--see Jonathan Harris's recent 2.0 art project, We Feel Fine, for a case study--and considering its potential for civic engagement or participation doesn't mean that we can or should discount the affordances that make it so accessible.

What we can do, I think, is consider the semiporous membrane that divides audience and public. Do we want to perform (we sometimes do) for a largely anonymous, often miniscule readership, or do we want (we sometimes do) to call our readers to action, to engagement, to participation? When do we want these different things, and why do we want them?

We talk about the difficulty we (read: educators; read: careerists, professionals; read: adults) sometimes have in making use of 2.0 spaces such as blogs and forums--depending, as we do, on the old standards of email and meeting notes. I think this isn't necessarily always because of fear, though it's true that as we get older we do tend, don't we, toward hand-wringing. Rather, I think that when faced with the option of a 2.0 resource, we're afraid to look like we're afraid. Resistance, to us, can equal ludditism. But sometimes we resist because though the resource may exist, the impetus to make use of its 2.0 affordances may not. Not so, my lord, objected the tragic prince; I am too much i'the sun.

It's true that not everything is blog-worthy, that not everything is worth the effort of 2.0 (or even 3.0--do you think web 4.0 is when the robots in our brains do all the communicating for us?). But if we're going to use blogs in the classroom, if we're going to consider the constraints and affordances of a 2.0-ready resource, we damn well better consider what makes a communication worthy of an audience or a public, what makes us want to reach out, and what makes this outreach "successful."