Against topical rants - Francis Berger

Continuing the recent theme against 'mass media', Francis Berger discusses the pros and cons of Christians writing 'outrage de jour' blog posts:

I have not and have never intended to make “outrage du jour” posts the focus of this blog. Nonetheless, I have indulged in a few posts of this kind over the past few months. 

The classic “outrage du jour” post is a raw reactionary rant railing against some controversy or other that has flared up in the mainstream media. Rage and disgust (often justifiable) fuel these posts. More often than not, they aim to instill rage and disgust into the reader. 

“Outrage du jour” posts serve a definite purpose – whether or not this purpose is beneficial or harmful depends on the topic addressed and the manner in which the writer has approached it. As with most things in life, outrage posts have their pros and cons. 

On the pro side, outrage posts draw attention to abuses and evildoing. Posts of this kind can be quite informative. Depending on a writer’s perspective, they can also be rather entertaining, perhaps even humorous. 

On the con side, outrage posts can breed smoldering anger, paranoia, and resentment...

Francis concludes that it is overall a bad idea to produce such topical, reactive posts - at least on a regualr basis. I concur, mostly because 'resentment' is a toxic emotion for a Christian - indeed one of the worst of sins, since it feeds upon itself and never can be assuaged.

Resentment is the opposite of forgiveness, and the point of forgiveness is primarily that it is necessary to the forgiver, not the forgiven.

My experience of topical, political blog posts is that they get the most page views - but make no difference to expanding the long-term core readership of the blog. The people who come to read and respond to a rant about the latest Leftist outrage, don't hang-around for the only possible answer: a Romantic Christian revival among Westerners in The West.