Renaissance Men Are Evolving Into Renaissance Networks

MountainRunner has a piece up called Social Media and Foreign Policy that has us distracted from our usual Navy discussions, so we are going to dive into this discussion a bit. Matt highlights this article up at the State Dept blog that asks about the "impact social media will have exactly on foreign policymaking", which sounds very familiar to the question we continue to ask, "What is the role of blogging in the national security debate?"

These are difficult questions with no clear answers, but we note that the right questions are being asked by many bloggers, for various reasons.

Blog reader calipygian and I traded a few comments on another blog based on a very interesting question he asked, "What is the role of the know-it-all generalist in today's specialized world where there is really no more room for Renaissance men?" It is a facinating question to us because it raises the question of whether Social Media, in particular blogs, are able to form a natural hierarchy to channel challenging, technical and complex discussions. There are plenty of blogger generalists out there, in particular within the scope of politics and entertainment, but what about for science, technology, and in particular the national security debate? They exist, they just aren't as popular as generalists, nor will they ever be.

I am reminded of a post by David Appell regarding professional bloggers. David ranted against Matthew Yglesias because a commenter posted a complex question which Matthew entertains an answer. David rants that Matthew would even entertain the answer and assume the role of an expert, which fair or not, is legitimate criticism. Then David concludes his rant with some thoughts we often consider ourselves.

So I am wondering why I am reading it any more, or why I am even writing meaningless tidbits in this blog (and that's all they are). Or why anyone is reading. Is this seriously the future of this magnificent medium? It would be a full-time job to really blog about a few serious issues on a particular beat, and who can possibly attract 125,000 readers a day and support yourself doing that?

So more and more I am focusing on real writing, detailed reporting for magazines where you can do some real investigation and reporting and your audience isn't just people reading over their calzone at lunch. I don't want to end up some vapid blogger who tries to say everything and so who says nothing whatsoever. Life is too short. I'm really not sure what the solution is.

As I have discussed in the past, I have a professional background building internet communities. 125,000 readers a day was common, one community I built had well over half a million readers a day, and this was nearly 10 years ago when there were much fewer internet users in general. I have some insight into large online communities, which might explain why I am less jaded on how emerging social networks develop... I've seen them mature over time and recognize that blogging is still a young medium. David's point is interesting though, the generalist blogger carries more influence in complex discussions than the professionals do, simply because the generalists have more readers. With that the case, is there any room for Renaissance men? Consider Matthew's response to David.

The only thing I have to say to defend myself from those charges is that I don't think the post was really about why I suck, it was about why the punditsphere as a whole sucks with me just as a prominent example. And he's right.

If, as Matthew suggests, the punditsphere "sucks" because the generalist doesn't have the expertise to answer complex questions in technical spheres of discussion, then what is the value of blogging? I would argue plenty, and if the "punditsphere" and generalist bloggers are seriously asking these questions, they are forwarding the medium more than they realize. What is still missing from the blogosphere is professional hierarchy, but that is developing.

We think the concept of "Renaissance men" is evolving into "Renaissance networks", they range from the generalists (like Matt and David), the interested citizens (you, being a politically active, informed citizen, in the case of this blog interested in military and specifically maritime strategy), and the larger network that extends to the specialists whom takes various forms like media and research, and who ultimately disseminate through various mediums including periodicals like Proceedings or even a Research organization like CSBA.

The point is, when one observes the evolution of social media networks, not only do we see a Think Tank 2.0 replacing the Think Tank in the future, we also see the development of a hierarchy of information dissemination from the generalists to the specialists for discussion, and back up to the generalists for broader information redistribution. This hierarchy is already well developed in politics, information technology, and entertainment, but the emergence of professional and topic centric blogs for the national security debate and foreign policymaking are slow in coming, but those blogs are emerging. It will take time for consensus to build among the "punditsphere" regarding who the professionals are, but we are already seeing movement on that as well.

The opinions expressed by both David Appell and Matthew Yglesias represents their frustration for misunderstanding their place in the emerging blogger hierarchy, their only fault being they are not really sure who the professionals they should recommend are. At the generalists level, they are the traffic cops of the emerging Renaissance Networks. Ultimately, in regards to the national security debate it will be the emergence and most importantly consensus acceptance of professional forums like the Small Wars Journal that the generalists direct traffic to that will complete the Renaissance Network, which in the blogging social media model, will only serve to eventually elevate the generalist even higher in the Renaissance Network.

After all, in blogging traffic is two way, not one way, and the strength of any one node in the Renaissance Network ultimately increases the strength of every node in the entire network as any specific policy conversation continues. In our opinion, the core nodes of the Renaissance Network already exist, and in some cases the professional nodes downstream already exist as well, but the links between the generalists core and the professional nodes are yet to be established.