Meta-Blogging: The Newest Literary Craze
So New, It’s Not Yet a Craze
And its Literary Merit is Also Up for Debate

After a work-induced unvacation from my blog discussions about blog discussions, I have returned to discover that the confusion surrounding Adrian Murdoch’s UNinvolvement with Simon and Schuster’s Imperium promotions has not yet been resolved. Perhaps it has been quietly sorted out, but I find no further explanation on Mr. Murdoch’s blog, Bread and Circuses, and I am somewhat loath to prod the bemused man about investigation, when I am responsible for unknowingly bringing the falsehood to his attention. And after all, the main aim of Bread and Circuses is genuine classical scholarship, not a possibly misguided rendition of Nancy Drew and the Occasionally Befuddling Habits of the Publishing Industry. Like other blogs I know. Ahem.

For those of you just tuning in on your radios at home, or for those of you too overwhelmed by the enormity of my persiflage in the last post to follow the link to the corresponding comments, let me explain. I read an article in the LA Times about the large amount of big-name books to be released this fall, in which, amongst other things, publishers noted that they were approaching bloggers to publicise new books in an effort to combat the crunch of advertising space. According to Josh Getlin, the author of the piece, Leah Wasielewski at Simon and Schuster had contacted Adrian Murdoch to promote Imperium on Bread and Circuses. I quote the original article:

At Simon & Schuster, for example, publicists and marketing directors have been reaching out to bloggers to boost Robert Harris’ political thriller “Imperium: A Novel of Ancient Rome.”

“This isn’t something I was doing a year ago, but I think it’s a huge opportunity for us now,” said marketing director Leah Wasielewski. “I got a fantastic response from some bloggers, and it makes sense because this approach allows us to target consumers directly and gauge their interest. You go right to the source.”

Among the sites that Wasielewski contacted were Bread and Circuses (http://adrianmurdoch. typepad.com/bread_and_ circuses), which deals with the later Roman empire; Prettier than Napoleon (http://bamber.blogspot.com), a blog on literary and legal issues; and Mental Multivitamin (http://mentalmultivitamin.blogspot.com) a literary site. All three generated reviews of “Imperium,” she said.

But Adrian Murdoch was never contacted by Simon and Schuster. About anything.

I found out about this because he was kind enough to call my attention to this error. BookInfo was not the only blog to take this aspect of the story and run with it; a cursory blog search revealed that other literary meta-blogging had perpetuated the myth, both at Population Statistic and at SmarterCompany.com.

So the question is: how did the rumour get started, and why? It’s true that Mr. Murdoch posted a Spectator review of Imperium; did Ms. Wasielewski find the post and assume that the blog must have been contacted? Or did she recognise Bread and Circuses as central enough to the community of blogging classicists to risk fabrication for the publicity, as one of the comments on Bread and Circuses surmises? “[Y]ou’re obviously someone they rate highly enough to make it up,” notes Tony Quinlan.

They’re both slightly unsatisfactory propositions, and I don’t simply mean from a moral standpoint. If Bread and Circuses already included a review in a blog post, why try to claim credit in retrospect? What publicity does it gain? It would appear to me to actually be a stronger recommendation for the book that someone posted a review about it without receiving a free copy, rather than bartering electronic words for printed ones.

Population Statistic’s author, Costa Tsiokos, when made aware of the incorrect information in the LA Times article, suggests that perhaps “the reporter flubbed it,” smartly noting that “the article never explicitly says those bloggers actually received books through S&S.” Very true. But “publicists and marketing directors have been reaching out to bloggers to boost Robert Harris’ political thriller Imperium: A Novel of Ancient Rome… Among the sites that Wasielewski contacted were Bread and Circuses (http://adrianmurdoch. typepad.com/bread_and_circuses), which deals with the later Roman empire… All three generated reviews of Imperium, she said” is an especially crafty piece of misinformation, if it was intended.

Perhaps it was merely miscommunication; it would not be the first time in history that the facts got unintentionally garbled from one person to the next, and I should probably put away my magnifying glass, pipe, and Deerstalker cap. But the question intrigues me in part because so much publicity about how blogs are good for publicity seems to be swarming around in the air, and never conclusively landing on the bowl of fruit. The fact that even part of one of these stories is incorrect, whether or not the error was intentional on anyone’s part, is the solitary dim shaft of light shed on the verity of the phenomenon as a whole. Though perhaps I should not seek reasons from the kind of people who also promote websites via paper fans.

And as an alternative to the blogs-as-answer-to-a-publisher’s-prayer brouhaha currently in circulation, an article found with thanks to PersonaNonData, is ready to warn us that blogging is “un-Christian,” at least according to the Reformed Church of God. (”Presumably, as simply the ‘Church of God’ they were mad bloggers,” quips Michael Cairns, the author of PersonaNonData.) Much of this is simply blathering on blogs - mindless words and idle communication. Blogs can be summed up as people talking about almost anything, but really nothing. There is no purpose to much of the contents - no direction,” explains Kevin Denee. Well, praise be! I’m saved from the double sin of meta-blogging hereafter.

At least until tomorrow.