Further to Lord Norton’s post and all your very helpful responses can you say if you would like more than 12 Lords to be blogging on a regular basis?
There is a history to this question. When I had my own blog as an MP and then as a Lord my problem was the work pressure it could put on you at times. That is why I recommended the group blog that we have now – it spreads the burden.
My view is that we ought to have at least 20 (or even more) regular Lords blogging as that gives variety without putting too much demand for time on a smaller number.
What do you think?
We did discuss whether a meeting with bloggers would be useful to discuss the way the site works but your comments on the entries so far seems to make this unnecessary and any meeting would be limited in numbers and probably biased towards London so I think this is unlikely to happen.
What do you think?
Finally one person seemed apologetic about slightly ‘techie’ suggestions. Don’t be! They are very useful and necessary and indeed any suggestions as to how we can publicise the blog would be very helpful. We do get good help and advice from the House and from Hansard on technical matters
You could do a liveblog meeting? Then it wouldn’t be London biased and could be open to all…
I think the main strength of this weblog is that it has a core number of Lords who blog very regularly. This is what leads to good community interaction, which makes the weblog a useful resource and effort.
Whilst I’d welcome an increase to the number of Lords contributing, I don’t think it’s necessary to sign them up as regular contributors. If the existing writers can continue to provide the core basis of updates and supplement this by inviting a lot more guest appearances, as they read the mood and interests of the readership, then I think the Lords of the Blog will continue to be a a highly interesting and informative resource.
I understand and appreciate the effort that the Lords put in to create this weblog but I do worry that a large increase in the number of regular bloggers would erode the excellent continuous and evolving dialogue with individual members that has been built here.
Lord Soley
you said:
> There is a history to this question. When I had my own blog as an MP and then as a Lord my problem was the work pressure it could put on you at times. That is why I recommended the group blog that we have now – it spreads the burden.
First off I would like to say that one common blog makes a lot more sense than a set of individual blogs. And I do not think that there is an optimal number of contributors, but around 10 or 20 regulars sound like a good idea. If you have too many, it may be difficult to figure out the style and background of the individual contributors, which I think is essential for a constructive dialogue.
On the technical side, I am happy as long as it works. I very much appreciate the RSS syndication feature: as a big fan of RSS, I hardly read any site regularly without RSS.
And maybe there is an opportunity there: with RSS, it is possible to aggregate a number of blogs on a single page. I am not sure whether there are any blogs apart from this one, but if so, you could integrate at least the stories in an aggregated page.
I think it would be worthwhile to involve as wide a range of contributors as possible. Although the Lords is always in the public eye, to hear first-hand the views of its members on the issues of the day would be valuable; they seem seldom to attain press coverage comparable to their colleagues in the Commons!
I agree with several of the comments already made that there is not so much harm in increasing the number of peers involved. I think the regular contributions by the Lords who currently are involved with the blog are invaluable, and I would hope that they would continue to blog as regularly as they do now. That being said, I think most people would like to see other Lords also contribute (as much or as little as they can). The more the better I say.
I think any diversity would be welcomed, and I think most readers could handle the extra posts by simply being more selective of what they read. In fact, I would imagine many of the peers will gather small followings of people who read their blogs most exclusively.
That being said, I do not mean to demand that any Lords (both current bloggers or potential new ones) post a certain quota of blogs. If it helps to spread the burden, please feel free to do so.
Regarding a meeting about changes to the site, I am not sure that it is necessary (although I am sure many would find it interesting at the very least). As I live in the States, this would not affect me anyway. However, suggestions for a liveblog might be worth examining.
I also have no real technical suggestions at this point. I will leave that to others.
I like reading your blog and have read it since day 1. I have also recommended it to the politics (and history) department at my daughters’ school. I am very pleased and admire the Lords who blog here. I agree with other commenters who say that a few “core Lord bloggers” give the blog a character. Other Lords can contribute occasionally (what the non-ennobled blogosphere calls “guest posts”). Anyway, the main thing is, keep blogging. You are reaching people. Remember – for every comment, you have 99 readers who don’t comment (or maybe more).
Lord Soley,
It occurred to me that if you had a ‘Lord of the Week’ [Peer of the Week?] feature, that would keep you going for over 10 years, assuming that you could coax some of the more shy animals in the forest out of the shadows..
Of course, many don’t inhabit the Palace of Westminster habitat, but I’m sure most drop in occasionally. Perhaps now that Bill Oddie has decided to step down from ‘Springwatch’ he might help try and spot some of the rarer ‘bird of bright plumage’ in ‘Lordwatch’ ?
I also think you should get Lord Peston on the blog – if his son has resorted to nicking his [rather amusing ] jokes, I’m sure he would be very entertaining…
I think this blog’s an excellent idea and am delighted to have encountered it, quite by accident, through a daily Google news alert for Harriet Harman, which we chaps in North Wales keep going lest she should visit the area + we need to evacuate quickly.
I took a bit of a look around before taking the plunge to gather together my first impressions, should they be of any utility. I pose the question of whether some may find it a trifle inhibiting?
Addressing any Lord is perhaps not something many of us mere mortals do on a daily basis and no doubt has some reaching for their reference books for forms of address. And here we find ourselves with a richness of Lords and Ladies, and myself stretching for an appropriate collective noun.
‘Your Lordships’ seems accurate, but a little obvious and therefore somewhat bland. A House of Lordships is overstating numbers. A Fleet of Lordships, perhaps? Or a Flotilla? Yes, a Flotilla seems appropriate.
So, having overcome inhibitions inherent in addressing the flotilla, one beholds that one is being monitored by the Hansard Society. I find myself conjuring up images of Her Majesty Herself moderating after breakfast, before a stroll with the corgis.
For some, a little overwhelming?
I suppose one could go to the opposite extreme and call it something like “Fred and Joe and Susan and Phil and Jane” or would that be going a bit far? Plus it doesn’t allow for people joining and leaving the band of bloggers.
There seems to be an absence of links in the comments I’ve read, I know not whether this is coincidental or they are being moderated out? One does like to provide some evidence for what one is saying.
But perhaps the key thing is reader impact on the agenda, as in any blog. I, for example, am very interested in certain aspects of the Policing and Crime Bill currently making its way through committee stage in the Commons, but it would presumably be a matter of luck whether an author would choose to post on the subject. It’s a bit of a conglomerate as a Bill and perhaps several posts would be in order for anyone embarking on covering the whole thing.
I realise there’s a feedback survey facility on the blog but perhaps a ‘contact us’ tab on the homepage would be an idea for suggestions over topics?
Also, I think the idea of numerous Lords and Ladies posting blogs has much to commend it, but I do hope you have no inhibitions about commenting on each others’ blogs.
Very best wishes with this blog + I hope to visit frequently and to help spread the word.
S
Please do keep blogging and get others to join . It would ease the burden and give a diversity of opinons and thoughts.
I get concerned when I read that MP’s want to change the Lords, but I am sure they would not want to change it too much as they might not be able to get in when they leave that other place.
I read the other day that welsh was spoken in the chamber. Is it true that the only offical language is either Latin or Normandy French? Enmglish is only spoken out of curtisy, as per the Vatican. Latin is the offical language but Italian and English is taken for granted as the common tongue. Is there anyone or can advise me on this please?
kind regards
PATRICK WALESBY
HEREFORD
Thank you for these comments. We are now thinking about next steps and hopefully will have more to say in the coming months.
I like the idea of a flotilla of lords but how about a blog of Peers?!
Norman French is spoken only on very specific occasions to indicate the Crown’s acceptance of an Act of Parliament. I haven’t heard Welsh spoken or Latin but I suspect Lord Norton is much more expert on this than me.