The question was raised yesterday in a comment on the blog as to whether I was willing to accept guest posts from those who have proved their ability as regular commentators.
The reality is that I have occasionally accepted guest posts on the blog, usually, but not always, from academic colleagues.
And there have also been occasions when comments offered as such have been promoted to being blogs in their own right.
But the reality is that I have very rarely commissioned such posts, and literally no-one except an academic has ever offered a post for publication that I can recall accepting.
That is not an ego issue. I have worked hard to ensure that this blog is open to a wide range of opinion, and take a lot of flak for doing so. The result is that this blog is already about very many more people than me. I guess my role is to set some of the subjects for debate.
I also promoted Progressive Pulse to provide an alternative outlet. This is now almost entirely run by Peter May, and in that sense the idea of diversification has not worked.
So, the question is, should that role of lead writer be shared? And who would want to offer a contribution? I would, I admit, retain full editorial rights, but there are many here who can write well and have valuable opinions.
Any thoughts? I am interested, whilst also wary of losing the essence of what the blog is. That's why I am asking.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
This is the best political economy blog on the net, due entirely to your hard work and intellectual rigour. It offers a clear explanation of the issues and a solution to many of the problems we face.
If someone criticises your analyses in a positive manner, you are happy to debate, and that makes for interesting reading.
I’m pretty sure that having guest contributors would not mean much of a reduction in your workload, and many contributions are mini blogs in themselves which stimulate further debate, so I’m not sure that guest lead articles would add that much. I dare say that, should someone write an interesting article, you’d be happy enough to give it a platform on here.
You seem to be a very busy guy, and if accepting guest writers would ease your workload, then of course go ahead.
Basically, I’m content with whatever you decide.
Thanks
Appreciated
Keep as is, I’d say, because as you note you already have what seem to be guest posts, and the comments section seem to work well imho.
Oh and I note the piece in the FT today about businesses failing because of cash flow… as you said, months ago.
And it could have been avoided (perhaps best not to rehearse that, but it really is infuriating – eye rolling emoji whilst tutting)
Thanks
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
If pushed, I could probably write something on the one or two narrow financial market issues but I prefer to just comment on the posts (leaving you, Richard, to do the hard work).
I know that you read the comments, I believe that some get incorporated in your thinking and this is then reflected in future posts. Certainly your posts about QE and MMT have evolved in the year or so I have been reading/commenting.
So, just keep going would be my suggestion.
Thanks
I learn a lot from the comments
I appreciate them
Thanks
Hello Richard.
My initial reaction is that you keep things as they are. Only you can express your thoughts in the clear style you have.
However, maybe then we are missing out on something. It’s true that the comments are equally as engrossing as the blog itself. Indeed they help to make it great. However, sometimes I find myself wading through loads of replies to re-read something. Also I sometimes want some replies to go further. I feel there’s more useful or interesting information the commentator could say.
So I suggest you have more guest posts, but maybe with a prefixed note that it is a guest post and as such you may not entirely agree with everything in it. Indeed you may wish to blog on the same subject yourself.
Not too many guest posts though.
Just my thoughts, for whatever they’re worth.
Your posts are well-written, thought-provoking and readers like me appreciate the chance to absorb your expertise, And the ways you answer so many complex political and economic questions.
Your blog is not only thought-provoking and knowledgeable — but also entertaining. These are the reasons I check your observations on daily basis.
Your courageous views are worth reading, and I know I am standing on the shoulders of a giant when I follow you writing.
At the same time, it would be interesting to find out about the potential brave choices you might make in selecting your guest writers for this blog – in a kind of pilot experiment which you could end at any time if it does not work.
Flipping an Antipodean coin might resolve your dilemma
According to one PhD thesis, the spinning Australian coin tends to fall toward the heavier side more often, leading to a pronounced number of extra “tails” results when it finally comes to rest.
Just my two cents …
If I may……………….
I’m not for guest posts. I find your work fundamentally honest and balanced, in the face of what seems at times like an internet avalanche of the same old bullshit.
There is no doubt that when you put up a post it is a very well considered and researched one, so what could be guest posts (offering a different view point) you may have already considered in your own writing.
This is what makes your blog stand out for me, as well as the fact that I share the same ‘moral sentiments’ in a number of areas it seems with you and others who come here. You also direct us to some of the resources you come across, as do your contributors. That works well.
Having said that, and depending on what you want these guests to say, it might work as way to broaden appeal. Only you see all the comments directed here and have a pretty good view of how effective the blog is.
The underlying direction we/you want to go in is for MMT, GND, resource accounting and ‘Murphian courageousness’ for example to grow in popularity. If guest blogs help that, then so be it.
Thanks
Noted
You might consider doing discussion videos with other economists or similar via your You Tube channel. Might help raise it’s profile.
Mark and I were discussing that before he became ill
Unfortunately, it now seems unlikely he will recover and so that plan is on hold for now
I’m very sorry to hear about Mark.
Richard,
The essence of the Blog is what Richard Murphy has created. Period. There is nothing to fix. I suspect you will lose more than you gain by changing it. Nevertheless, if there is a time you feel the burden of the Blog must be shared, that is entirely your editorial prerogative; but that too will have risks.
I note Mr Parry’s comments, but I still look forward to that joint Murphy-Parry Blog on one of the MMT banking matters discussed in the comment section that deserve exploration in a Blog. I have not forgotten that Mz Schofield was going to develop ideas arising from ‘stop the Execheuer’, either!
I za not seeking to share the burden. Except when trolled I rarely find this activity a burden. I was seeking more depth. The suggestion is that this is elsewhere
I recommend Progressive Pulse – which would welcome more contributions, as well as Barve New Europe
Personally, I would welcome say Stephanie Kelton, Warren Mosler, Danny Blanchflower from the US side doing an occasional post (but Danny can only talk about GB happy fish..). From people who respond on here, I would also welcome Clive (too modest) Parry, Tim Rideout and Mike Parr to share some of their field of knowledge.
I suspect that Clive Parry may be right that his posts are better as observations on Richard’s posts, clarifying the dark art of banking etc. But it may still be useful.
I will bear that in mind, b it it looks like the sentiment is that it would be occasional
Richard
” It’s my party “,,,,,,,,
I’d leave it as it is
as long as your health is ok
I am in pretty good nick right now
For a 62 year old I am probably pretty unusual in having no ‘underlying health conditions’ as some like to call them
But I don’t take that for granted
Agree with previous sentiments – informative and thought-provoking as it is now. Also you and those who comment often give links to other sources which widens the scope anyhow. Thanks for your efforts, Richard.
I am also happy with whatever you decide. You often quote a relevant or interesting article which acts as a signpost to further reading if we wish.
That could be enough.
“[Progressive Pulse] is now almost entirely run by Peter May” – and it would be even better if it weren’t!
Would others like to contribute?
I have contributed a couple of pieces to PP in recent months and when I get time submit comments in response to Peter’s posts and/or other commentators’ comments – quite a lively one going on at the moment with Peter, Gerry Toner and me. To often though what looks like shaping up to become a cracking good debate just peters out (no pun intended Peter).
This blog would be a lot better if it didn’t keep recycling the same tired old topics rehashed. Probably also be better if any research had gone into many of the posts at all, rather than just churning out as much second hand garbage you got on the internet somewhere.
It would also be better if you actually answered people’s comments properly and actually allowed dissent. More often than not you are wrong but as soon as someone points out a flaw in your argument, or something you have said that is factually incorrect, you go all playground and start abusing them, preening about how clever and important you are and literally just fist type “I’m right, you are wrong” no matter how obvious a fool you are being.
Just a thought, you know. This blog is basically a source of amusement for the accounting and economics disciplines.
Why bother to read it then, as you obviously are?
Could it just be that you are not quite being honest with the truth?
PS Don’t bother trying to reply
Question: “Why bother to read it then, as you obviously are?”
Answer: “This blog is basically a source of amusement for the accounting and economics disciplines.”
This blog really is so predictable. It’s just a case of guessing if the latest topic will be some rhetorical whining about evil Tories, some ass-kissing to the EU or SNP, some junk economics about MMT, a piece detailing how important, moral and clever you are or just generally saying nasty rich people should be taxed more.
Then the comments either have your sycophantic little followers passing the shared brain cell in a rush to agree with you, or you throwing your toys out of the pram with a commentator who dares disagree with the great man himself. When the man in question can’t answer simple question without exposing his lack of knowledge or tying himself in knots. The picture of you rage thrashing away at your keyboard does come to mind.
The hypocrisy you put on display is something to behold. You are the Walter Mitty of the tax, accounting and economics world, and it is a joy to watch. If a little disconcerting that someone has such little self-awareness.
If you really thought that you would not have paid so much attention.
And nor would the tax, accounting and economics world.
You prove yourself wrong.
But by getting round being blocked once you proved also what you really are, and that’s a troll
You don’t need guest posts on here and I do not see that it would enhance the work.
I don’t think we (we??) need guest posts. You occasionally re-post an item from someone – a friend, colleague or just a blogger who has caught your eye – and I think that’s welcome and doesn’t affect the “persona” of TRUK.
I regularly visit Progressive Pulse and am very impressed with the breadth and scope of Peter’s posts and the laid-back way he responds to comments. It’s an ideal platform for those who would wish to develop ideas about social justice more generally.
I’d encourage people to contact Peter with ideas then
I’ll add my voice to the “keep it as it is” crowd.
I think the blog works very well, and I’ve learnt a lot from both your writing (which is very much appreciated), and the comments underneath.
I also enjoy joining in, when my limited knowledge allows, and I really appreciate having this space for discussion, especially as such spaces are currently few and far between.
In fact, I think it is the ‘Murphy Subject Starter’ followed by discussion which makes your blog so great
Thanks
I’m still working on my piece about the relevance of Christine’s Desan’s work. A lot to be said and a lot of thinking what to put in and what to leave out. About two-thirds done.
Would be good to see it
I think the current format is fine. Its is rather like having access to your head at times, having others chip in can help(*sometimes) a two way exercise, you get to listen to reflected ideas and we also to learn as well. Though you don’t suffer fools gladly, which is a absolute necessity on a blog like this. I don’t know how you manage not to get stressed out all the time. I have enough of a job just keeping up with your posts alone let alone debating with a dozen other at the same time. Being confident in your remit obviously helps.
Maybe have to odd guest on just to shake it up and see how it goes. I do like the Tax Justice people ,if you want a suggestion for the next one!
Thanks
I actually also spend 80% of the day on other stuff
Two projects from this year will be out soon
Well, that answers that question – everyone likes the blog the way it is! And I agree.
Good idea to expand your You Tube videos to guest discussions or interviews – harder to get them into 5-10 min sessions though, so careful thought on format might be required, when you are ready of course.
I’m very sorry to hear about Mark, that must have been devastating news for you. I hope you get a chance to spend time with him – and keeping a positive and determined frame of mind for him can only help.
We’ve been taking a fair bit
He’s become a friend
So video development is a bit on hold now
This is your blog, Richard, and I come here to see what you have to say – always worth doing for the always topical content – with an added bonus that I can add my twopennoth of comment if I feel the need.
However, it is the generally excellent observations of your perceptive regulars that add a greater bonus. It all works so well together, that change is unnecessary.
Guests to dialogue with would be a much better alternative than guest posts if you felt yourself, however, that some change was required.
I think there will be no change
Thanks for the comment
Terrible news about Mark.
Keep your voice as clear as you can Professor.
Really looking forward to yout hopefully imminent new works.
I have suggested before, that what we need is a truly independent regular ‘publication’ that caters for the left behind genuine progressives of this country. With multi disciplined writers who are truly independent – such as yourself – on all the daily issues of being a human being. A platform that would be aimed at the general public; Where the writers would not be held to an editorial line to keep their bread and butter.
Maybe some genuine super rich like minded personages could be persuaded to set up a endowment which would guarantee the career long incomes for such journalism and you along with others would form such an enterprise.
That would be the way to collect multiple voices to best effect.
Unfortunately I don’t play the lottery , paying the idiots tax, so can’t see where to lay my hands on the £20million min (at a guess) that would kick start such a endeavour. It would face maximum resistance from all quarters and hence need corporate levels of resiliance.
Having said that, who knows what, as yet unknown, future business model would succeed?
In personal situations when asked by good friends what to do with quandries, I ultimately end up advising:
You must do what you think is best.
Some attempts at that do exist e.g. the Atlantic and maybe Medium
But none are really there yet
I have not contributed to either
You could try Brave New Europe
I would like to hear more from Helen Schofield(?) She writes really clearly and the background references adds other dimensions to your brilliantly argued narrative. As a potential City Councillor such depth would be invaluable when tackling officers steeped in neo liberal conformity.
I always appreciate Helen’s comments, especially the challenging ones
IMHO, no need for guest posts. You are a prodigious blogger, with a lot of interesting & pertinent things to say.
Thanks