Since I wrote the post Boring As It Gets: The Aggregator Question, a few things that have been rather obvious, but not included in any discussion about aggregators, editorial policies, and online publishing. Not only that, some points need to be RE-emphasised, because people are blatantly missing the point.
I will address the issues in point form rather than my usual narrative. Of course, I will still do that Aussie thing, so you can be sure that you will be swimming in shark infested waters, walking online over run by funnel web spiders, redbacks, taipans and big noting myself [right Liam! 
]
1. DeafRead: The Dashboard.
Sure, DeafRead’s feature allows a reader to filter what they want to read or watch according to personal preferences. But the content available to us is determined by DeafRead’s editorial policy and publishing guidelines. The same with deaf village. The effect their policies have is to actually dampen, rather than encourage blogging and vlogging. While there is some diversity present, in that deaf and Deaf viewpoints are being published, there is no sense of liberation that comes with freedom of expression. There is no sense of liberation that comes with sharing a unique viewpoint. It’s all circumscribed by editorial policies that state, it must be relevant to Deaf. Well, editors, everything I write about IS relevant to Deaf. I am Deaf, I know I am writing to a Deaf and deaf audience, and don’t need to repeat that face ad nauseam, in order to pass the publishing guidelines that allows my post to show up in the main feed.
2. Deaf People and Diversity.
Deaf people are diverse. Deaf people practice diversity. Deaf people are pragmatic. Deaf people are accepting of the implant. Deaf people are accepting of deaf people who use technology to be able to hear. Deaf people are actually talking to people with implants and learning to see [and accept their point of view]. Deaf people do experience things other than being Deaf. So, what is this beef about diversity? You mean, we need to accept that any space we set up, it must also be opened up to different viewpoints, all in the name of diversity. Do you mean, we need to accept oralist and disabled bullshit, without questioning they do? Do you mean that we do all the access work for people who have no intention of accepting, experiencing or participating in Deaf culture and sign language, let alone embrace it, on its own terms? Well, I have a picture of a bird here for you to look at and ponder. A rather unique bird. It looks like a fist with the middle finger sticking right up!
3. Deaf Aggregators: Culturally Specific
Enough has been said about this. It’s gunna come. It’s gunna happen. It’s gunna make you wet your nappies, over the lack of stories about mapping, the lack of stories about counting the days to the implant, the lack of songs praising Cochlear Implant Laboratories all the world over, the lack of, of, of, of, come to think of it, deaf village should be encouraging podcasts. Then we can see an outbreak of venom over the lack of accessibility to these podcasts. Captioned podcasts anyone?
4. Aggregators Achilles Heel
The problem with DeafRead, deaf village and other aggregators that implement CONTENT restrictive policies, is that they run the danger of becoming irrelevant. Serious bloggers would not rely on one publishing medium. That is true. Sure, DeafRead and deaf village serve as a one stop shop for Deaf and deaf related content, but their positions are being undermined, not just by their editorial policies, but also technology.
There are now services that allow you to publish to a wide range of feeds, exposing your content and blog to a wider audience. This does not mean there is no place for Deaf and deaf centred aggregators, but it does mean that, if you piss off the bloggers who embrace freedom of expression, they will go elsewhere, and that is happening. While waiting for the Deaf Centred Aggregator to get up and running, I use TwitterFeed, that allows me to publish to Twitter and Facebook, for example. These services are meant to complement the work of aggregators, not become a platform by which aggregators are deserted, allowing them to become a barren wasteland of irrelevant links.
5. Deaf People, Diversity, and Blogging
I am Deaf. My inclusion on DeafRead is a testament to that. So why do all my writings have to be OBVIOUSLY Deaf related? Why can’t I be free to write about anything at all, without reminding readers, viewers and people about my Deafness. Why isn’t my Deafness taken as granted by my inclusion on DeafRead? What can’t DeafRead be an open platform, with the ability to filter content based on the reader’s personal preferences and not the editors? Why is there this need for an old world hierarchal system that attempts to control the information flow? This issue deserves a blog post of it’s own, so I won’t blather about it here. But I’m sure you get the gist of what I am saying!
Related Posts:
Boring As It Gets: The Aggregator Question
Powered by Zoundry Raven
