Blogs, on the other hand, have the benefits that come from no filter: their passion for or against a book, or their complex thoughts about it, are subject to no one's editing but their own. Most of the litblogs whose reviews are worth reading know more or less what they like and don't tend to write reviews hoping for another free book or a mention in the publisher's catalog. There's no reason for them to write unless they want to, and there's no reason for anyone to read them unless they like what they're writing. That can make for some crazies or duds, but it can also make for some powerful and impassioned writing and some creative ways of talking about books that can't happen in the slower-moving systems of an institution.
My Two Cents on Book Reviews, Written Nerd, 05 May 2007
Of course, the down side is the commercial marketing of blogs with advertising from publishers and Amazon, which may or may not skew a blog in any specific direction. When a LitBlog becomes popular enough, however, the writers/editors can gain the attention of authors and earn clout to post interviews, author penned essays, etc. which are a huge bonus to any blog's readers. Ultimately it depends on the blog writer's goal. That initial goal may morph over time, but I agree with WN that the best blogs are ones focusing on what its writer knows and loves, then writes about it. It's like handselling a book or chatting with a good friend who you know will always give you exactly what you will love to read.
