It's kind of remarkable how quickly blogging went from cutting edge to over the hill. This site is truly now a dinosaur:
We will still have blogs, of course, if only because the word is flexible enough to encompass a very wide range of publishing platforms: Basically, anything that contains a scrollable stream of posts is a "blog." What we are losing is the personal blog and the themed blog. Less and less do readers have the patience for a certain writer or even certain subject matter. Instead, they use social media to efficiently pick exactly what they do and do not click on, rather than reading what a blogger or blog offers them. In part due to his melodramatic intellectual style, Sullivan's blog was almost like a soap opera pegged to the news cycle—which I mean as the highest compliment. Smith's blog, too, had its specific scoops (Jewish politics, labor politics). And Media Decoder frequently brought a Times-type sensibility to media stories not big enough to merit their own staid articles in the ink edition. A necessary byproduct was that even if you were a devotee, you were not interested in about half of their posts. You didn't complain, because you didn't have an alternative. Now, in the form of your Twitter feed, you do, and so these old-style blogs have no place anymore.
I've talked this over with a couple of my fellow blogger friends recently, and we all pretty much agree that the whole blog concept has been obliterated by Twitter. I can only speak to my own experience, but 5-6 years ago i tripped out on blogs because newspaper websites still mostly updated just once a day with that's day's dead-tree stories, while blogs -- which updated 5, 10, 15 times a day -- were where the excitement was. Today, with a Twitter post flying at you every couple of seconds, blogs suddenly look like Ryan Howard trying to run the bases, and if you follow enough Twitter people, you'll get a wider range of information.