I nearly unsubscribed a few months ago, because money was tight, I hadn't read the last 6 months worth, which just piled up on my desk. I was overrun with college readings and, well, I wasn't getting value for money because I don't even own a coffee table they could sit on. Plus, my mate joked for a while that, "It's just book reviews these days".
However, after chatting with another friend I decided to re-subscribe. As a big fan of Matthias Media and of the idea of The Briefing, I thought its a way of supporting them and also in the hope that another 12 months would get me back on the reading wagon. Well, I'm back, baby. And loving every minute of it.
Did you read the April edition?
- Three great 'Couldn't Help Noticing' articles. Sure, not as blatantly opinionated as the old 'lead balloon' column they used to have, but there was something here for everyone – a pop culture piece from Bolty, some protestant basics from Lionel Windsor, and another subtle corrective to the rhetoric of many church-planters from Peter Sholl on wanting our churches to be "distinctive".
- Mark Thompson on 'Have we got the right Bible?', examining the claim that it was the early church which sat above the Bible and determined the canonicity of particular books. In fact, it was a great summary of 2 doctrine lectures from a few weeks ago. Good teaser for Moore College.
- Justin Moffatt making enough generalisations to get his point across as he compared ministry in Sydney, New York, and London (note to self: talk to famous conference speakers in the hope you get invitations to travel internationally).
- Paul Harrington is on the pulse of subtle correctives as he examines what exactly is strategic planning, as he asks 'strategic about what?'
- A continuation in the series of classic christian books with a review of 'the universe next door'.
The Briefing is on the pulse in a way that blogs try to be but
A. Don't put enough thought into, and
B. No one bothers to read the post if the blog is long enough to achieve A.
The Briefing is on the pulse in a way books aren't because
A. They're too long
B. They take too long from concept to publication.
I'm reading a few less blogs, to engage my mind at a bit more depth.
Have I convinced you enough to renew your subscription?
You do have a bit of a vested interest, don't you? :)
ReplyDeleteI'm not convinced. I still think that The Briefing fits into a category of media that is dying. It isn't 'deep' in the way that a book is, but also isn't fast-paced enough to be able to engage in the conversations that take place in the Blog and Twitter realms.
That said, I continue to pay for my parent's subscription because it is perfect for them as non-Internet users.
Vested interest implies some sort of financial benefit. But in the interest of full disclosure, the only benefit I've received from the book reviews is a few free copies in lieu of payment.
ReplyDeleteI do see what you're saying about a "dying" media category, but its not a magazine in the traditional sense, it's not a newspaper, it's a kind of periodical/journal type publication.
It's true that blogs are constantly updated, but I think in some ways its a weakness. Controversies get bought up, often full of vitriol, rarely is this countered with reasoned response. People go for controversy (believe me, it gets more hits).
The thing with blogs and with many things online, is the existing culture associated with the online world. It's all about new, fast, brief. Blogs are merely taking the brief out of briefing. Okay, I don't even know what that means, but you get my point. When I go online, I want to gaze over emails, gaze over 'status updates', skim through the herald online, look for funny or controversial blog posts.
For me, I think the online world will – considering its history - be the best forum for the kind of details analysis that is reflected in the main briefing articles.
Be honest, do you really read all of Michael Jensen's posts? He tries to blogify his articles by posting them in 16 parts, but its just not meant for that.
My vow is to read less broadly (including, or rather especially blogs), read deeper (including books), and choose reading which will force me to be considered and be beneficial to my service of Jesus (which includes reading the Briefing).
Even if the form goes digital, I think the concept of coming back to it, or reading slowly, or re-reading is not the way most people read stuff online. Sure, it might be the usage rather than the medium, but thats my point.
By the way, to the dear people who have diligently checked my blog during my absence, thank you. Don't know why, but you keep coming back. I hope to reward your diligence from now on. Because I too am back, baby.
My apologies, I had not realised (and am actually quite shocked) that you were not being paid for your reviews.
ReplyDeleteI'd rather read MORE broadly and also more deeply. Depth for the way it helps me understand Jesus better, and breadth for the way it helps me to keep in touch with our world and culture. Both aims won't be achieved in the same act, of course. That's why I read books (for the depth), and also blogs and magazines and newspapers (for the breadth).
The Briefing is still good, but my time is limited. By the time I have read my broad stuff and my deep stuff there simply aren't any hours left for the 'middle ground' of semi-deep and semi-broad.
Perhaps I wasn't meant to advertise that fact. Oops. But anyway, let's be honest, a book review is 1-2 pages. Not exactly a deep theological feature article (which is paid). My first review came initially from this blog... it was already written. The latest I wrote in conjunction with my essay on atonement and was planning on reading the book anyway. All in all, I think its fair. :)
ReplyDeleteI'm suggesting the middle ground actually engages with issues better than blogs. Therefore my time choice is to read less blogs, read more articles. Though I do see where your coming from.
*you're
ReplyDeleteI went off the Briefing for a while, but enjoy it again now. For a while the tone was a bit 'superior', if that makes sense. I can read it in bed or sitting outside, which is inherently more relaxing than sitting at a computer. Now the most annoying thing is when I've already read some of the short articles online on people's blogs. Ripped off! :)
ReplyDelete