I've seen some "definitions" of weblogs in the more mainstream Internet press (yeah, I know, oxymoron, but I don't read physical newspapers much anymore) where they paint the idiom as almost purely news commentary. You link to some article, and make your hay.

While I don't agree with that, Paul Krugman makes a great point in today's New York Times (registration required), calling President Bush to the carpet for the statement, in his weekly radio address, that "the tax relief I propose will give 23 million small-business owners an average tax cut of $2,042 this year." I could do the math to see exactly how many business owners could actually see a tax cut of zero and have that statement be true, but I'll leave that to Krugman himself. See, there's this book, called "How to Lie with Statistics," and it seems to be required reading for the Bush economic team.

Other parts of the blogosphere are populated by journalists themselves, reporters and columnists and whatnot. Not only am I following their rules for what constitutes a blog today, I am now one of them. That's right, the Chicago Fire are giving me a monthly soccer column on their website. As the future of that effort depends on people actually reading it, or acting like they're reading it, please click on that link, would ya? Now click it again. And again. Thanks.