I’ve been a daily user of Google Reader for the past year, using it to keep track of all the blogs I read. Daily use has meant that I’ve been acutely aware of each new feature that has been gradually added over the last few months. Usually these are welcome, but as Google attempts to add more social features I fear they are reducing the ability of authors and readers to follow conversations spawned from blog posts – which is considered a traditional and necessary feature of the blogosphere. That’s not to say that Google are the only ones doing this, both Facebook and Twitter have elements to them that is contributing to this.

For a long time Google Reader has allowed users to share blog posts of interest to friends  that were also using GR and slowly but surely I am starting to build up a list of friends that I share with and they reciprocate in kind. This is a form of social bookmarking, but unlike sites like Digg the author of the blog post cannot track how many times their work is shared, or by whom. GR also now features the ability to leave comments on blog posts and – at least from a blog author’s perspective – is unwelcome, because these conversations are kept private. Private social bookmarking and private blog commenting has negative implications because trackbacks and blog comments are an integral part of the blogging experience and can reinforce an author’s motivation and drive to continue writing.

Facebook and Twitter also provide you with the ability to social bookmark and comment, but again without  direct trackback links, so a blog author can never tell who is linking to their work, and misses out on many of the conversations spawned.

The lack of trackbacks and private blog comment conversations on Google Reader, Facebook and Twitter is  completely irresponsible but is in no way the fault of the reader. Google and Facebook especially understand the value of user generated content, today the most prolific of which is the simple conversation – as demonstrated by the rise of Twitter. By poaching blog comments and putting them behind private walls they are of course trying to keep their users within their own walled networks, which in the long run, could discourage bloggers from continuing to write.

Yes some of us write for ourselves, but many write for an audience, and it would be tragic for a blogger to stop writing because their audience had started privately, rather than publically, encouraging them.

Interestingly of the approx. 40% that blog using a pseudonym, 23% of this group also blogged using their real name. This suggests that some bloggers are taking advantage of both the benefits of blogging as themselves i.e benefits to reputation, and also anonymously somewhere else online. Anonymity online can help individuals to explore their identity, reduce shyness and encourage interactions with others online.

Though the Internet does help to support strong tie relationships, it is particularity effective for weak tie groups, allowing for the efficient flow of information and facilitating the development of ideas, blogospheres are a particularly good example of how the internet facilitates this.

The blogosphere is a classic social network but its characteristics differentiate it from most social networks, where communication is predominantly verbal and unrecorded. Networks of bloggers will often aggregate all of their individual blogs to a centralised location online, and these are referred to as planet aggregators an example of which is Irishblogs.ie.

However, some blogs are more connected to a blogosphere than others, with some bloggers not being connected to any blogosphere at all. Over 65% of bloggers indicated that they were listed on an Irish planet aggregator, and almost 64% consider themselves a member of the Irish blogosphere. The remaining bloggers indicated that they were not listed and did not consider themselves part of the Irish blogosphere. This highlights the 35% of bloggers unconnected from the Irish blogosphere, and this could suggest that there are far more Irish people blogging than is known.