There is a fairly solid economics-style argument for this – in the past, writing “supply” (opportunities, resources, time, literacy, mediums, venues) was scarce, and so when it did occur it was given higher value (more time and consideration). Now, most of us have ample opportunity (and even obligation) to write – and so each single instance of it has relatively less value.
(emphasis mine)
We lose something when we always write without depth and focus. Composing, reviewing, editing, and iterating refines not just our words but our thoughts. Taking time and using single-purpose tools – tactile physical keyboards, pencil and paper, even typewriters – forces us to invest in thought, and that pays dividends.
The last paragraph covers the gist – it is more economical to blog than to tweet. I steal time from my clinic – when waiting for the patients to stroll in or earlier in the morning when I prematurely finish my reading (it takes over two hours to process the mass of reading). I think and I blog. I use some specific tools to make the process faster- for example, grammar checking, that goes in the background. However, I am invested to write. I have reiterated several times- blogging gives you a sandbox to play with the ideas that helps you to make deeper connections. I realise certain limitations of what I read, and therefore, it is instructive and imperative to refine your workflows.
Long-forms are reserved for specific occasions it helps me distil my thoughts further. You gain and gather focus, which translates into specifics while you speak, and it becomes more refined. Your thought patterns become clear and get you in the decisive mode. That’s why I can judge the inherent value of a write-up (and policy) while I skim and get to the crux when I do a deep dive.
If you don’t focus on how the website looks, how the analytics hold up, or who responds the most on Twitter – you’d get past the initial writing anxiety. Thats when the ideas will flow and you’d start writing. No Tweet. Only Blog.
RadOncNotes 