Andrew Sullivan

Sullivan rattles off a list of qualities essential to blogs, most of which have some sort of associated disadvantage that can only be overlooked with good faith. For instance, he recommends "embracing hazards" such as spontaneous posting, an act that often results in emotionally-charged but rationally-hollow writing. Perhaps the reason why Andrew Sullivan blogs is the very reason others do not.
Acknowledging the lack of finish characteristic of a blog post, he advocates his preferred medium by championing the “risk of error” closely associated with the one-step process. To him, making mistakes in front of the whole world is not so bad because it is built into the medium—presumed to be the case. For others, making mistakes is not something so easily dismissed. His relaxation at the thought of being called out shows the resilience of a many-times-burned writer.
All in all, blogging’s disadvantages, which Sullivan may find endearing, are only overlookable when considering the sheer power and relative ease that goes along with instant, online publication. For many, the pros (such as the potential for broad audiences) may not outweigh the cons.
I guess spending years writing for a traditional, paper periodical and having to go through the arduous publication process is enough to give anyone a taste for the simple things, and blogging is most certainly a simple thing. It can be with little effort by anyone with internet access, almost as easily as checking email. But if this simple method of getting ones word out is held highly even by a professional writer as a favorite form of communication, I think it deserves our attention.