Now Reading
Slow Blogging? That’s Article Writing, People!

Slow Blogging? That’s Article Writing, People!

The Guardian’s Jon Henley writes about Slow Blogging, which apparently was branded by Todd Sieling, some Canadian tech consultant that doesn’t have his own Wikipedia page, although I’m pretty sure he can exist anyway. Henley quotes this Sieling fellow like this: “a rejection of immediacy … an affirmation that not all things worth reading are written quickly” and “speaking like it matters, like the pixels that give your words form are precious and rare”, and more. Obviously there’s a manifesto as well, which I honestly haven’t bothered with finding.

Slow Blogging. Right. It appeals to Henley, who think it is something to applaud.

So let’s hear it for all those who take the time to think, study and reflect before they post; who do not feel the need to slap the first thing that comes out of their head straight onto the web. People who refuse to update five times a day, or even once a week. People who value quality over quantity.

Sure. Hear hear.

Thing is, lots of bloggers and journalists do that, in a high pace, while others just cram out a reflection of something else. Much like this editorial, and, I assume, much like Henley’s piece. Reflection is all well and good, but in the end, it’s the end result that matter. Taking my time with a post doesn’t make me a Slow Blogging blogger, it’s more a matter of taking the traditional article approach to something. There’s no need to differentiate between Slow Bloggers and, let’s say it, Fast Bloggers, because it is all a matter of the end result.

There’s Fast Food and Slow Food, the latter probably being where Sieling got the idea to this whole Slow Blogging nonsense. Difference is, where Fast Food isn’t healthy (in general), fast blogging is a timestamp of today. No one will care about the Big Mac you had yesterday, but the five quick paragraphs that you wrote on the protestors squatting Bangkok airport, before it broke the news, will matter.

See Also
blog editing

Slow Blogging is a term that has no meaning. You can be a slow writer, or a thorough researcher, but making up something like Slow Blogging feels totally redundant to me. We don’t need a Slow Blogging movement, we need good content and quality comments.

It’s all in the end result, whether you’re writing a blog post, or a 10 page piece in a printed magazine. Who cares how you do it, as long as it is good.

View Comments (4)
  • Obviously there’s a manifesto as well, which I honestly haven’t bothered with finding. […] Slow Blogging is a term that has no meaning.

    Perhaps it would have been good to slow down enough to find out the meaning of the term. The manifesto not only clarifies why a Slow Blogging movement is needed, its very first point seems to have particular relevance to your post:

    Slow Blogging is a rejection of immediacy. It is an affirmation that not all things worth reading are written quickly, and that many thoughts are best served after being fully baked and worded in an even temperament.

  • The post that proves Slow Blogging’s point; well done!

    “I’m too harried, too hurried, too self-important to actually investigate, to research, to look up; I’m just a mouthpiece high on Internet crack; a shill, a blurtmaster.”


  • I beg to differ. Quick and instant blogging captures the mood and thoughts spontaneously than slow blogging or article writing who may tend to edit contents based on afterthoughts. Anyway the point made here that what matters is the end result is apt is almost all cases. The only places I would like to see quick blogging to judge someone’s true emotional reactions would be a political or complaints blog entry!.

Scroll To Top