That said, that thing we call a blog is just a publishing tool. What it really boils down to is personal ethics. If I as a person believe that yes, I need to reference everything, then I’ll do it. The person who doesn’t think he needs to, won’t. But it’s not our purview to enforce, because its not law. You still have your choice, just don’t read that blog ever again.

A while back, there was a healthy debate going on in the blogosphere (in the US) about the issue of disclosure. Is it okay for bloggers to take free products from a company, write about it but not say that they got products for free? Some bloggers say no, “I insist on telling people where and how I got the products.” Some bloggers say yes, “It’s my business whether I tell people or not.”

Both are entitled to their opinion. And readers are too! If I as a reader disagrees with the ethics of a blog, then I’ll just stop reading it. But the interesting thing is, even this “less ethical” blogs have readers.

Similarly, with tabloids, you can actually be sure that more than half the “news” contained is rumor or wild speculation. Yet, tabloids don’t break the law and still sell well. People do want to read. They might not have great reputations, but they still have an audience.

So in the end, as with any media, my two cents is that blogging is and will still be democratised. It’s plural in opinion. And everyone is entitled to their own. So long as they don’t break the law.