The computer, with its multiplying forums for spontaneous free expression from e-mail to listservs and blogs, has increased facility and fluency of language but degraded sensitivity to the individual word and reduced respect for organized argument, the process of deductive reasoning.
There are an ever increasing number of philosophy blogs out there — it would be sad if we were reducing respect for organized argument, given the central role it plays in philosophical methodology (right behind thinking about things).
It strikes me that blogging about philosophy can be a technological variation of some old standbys in philosophy — sitting around the [department/bar/pool hall/colleague’s house] trying out positions and arguments, and getting drunk at conferences and trying to explain your [book/latest paper/PhD thesis] to an equally drunk colleague. That is, its a few steps before circulation of manuscripts and discussion in formal reading groups on the generation process. Of course, philosophy blogs may well be other things as well — social commentary, personal indulgencies (like this one), or a forum for real work more like manuscript circulation.
The point is, its tough for me to see why the media of blogs, listservs, and email make them inherently likely to reduce respect for organized argument — its what you do with them that counts. Its probably unpatriotic of me as a Canadian to say this, but McLuhan was wrong — the medium isn’t the message.