- BBC Institutional Bias
- Disenfranchised of Buckingham
- Gallimaufry and Chips
- Jim Greenhalf
- Infinite Unknown
- Junius on UKIP
- Max Farquar
- Mick Hartley
- The Cynical Tendency
- The Ranting Penguin
The problem for all of us is the volume, and sorting the wheat from the chaff. You could easily spend the whole day touring the blogosphere and, while you would pick up some superb material, there would also be a lot of dross.
However, I am no great fan of the ranking system that Iain Dale used ... how do you rate one blog as better than another? But, I'm minded to look at grading, such as the star system, widely used elsewhere. Three criteria come to mind: writing (quality of); frequency; and presentation. A technical marking scheme should not be too hard to devise, with stars perhaps awarded by a panel of bloggers (peer approval?) on the basis of strict application of the agreed system.
Frequency seems easiest to rank, say: five stars for multiple entries per day; four stars for at least five daily entries in a week; three stars for at least weekly; two stars for at least monthly, and one star for less frequent.
Combine that with perhaps symbols to denote specialisms (economic; British party politics; Scottish politics; European politics; climate change; military ... etc., etc.), and there may be the germs of system that would help see off the likes of Huff-Puff and the MSM, which would like to take over the blogosphere, giving guidance to the readers who are, after all, the "customer".
What think you ... what say you? Forum is open for new registrations, or you can add a comment on the IPB site.