While listening to a panel discussion called “Being Opinionated in America” from the University of Berkeley that featured Maureen Dowd and Thomas L. Friedman (available for free download at iTunes), I noted that Friedman was particularly transparent in his approach to writing foreign affairs columns for The New York Times. Five Points Gleaned From Thomas L. Friedman • Writes fact-based commentaries that are reasonably objective • Does not write to make friends and not doing so has no impact • Consults with a brain trust of five people; reasonably transparent • Fact checks for accuracy; seeks outside sources; no oversight • Does not discriminate between the level of expertise and value of the insight In drawing comparisons between his approach and that of bloggers, there seem to be some relatively minor distinctions, with most depending on the specific blogger. Five Common Distinctions With Bloggers • Some bloggers do write fact-based commentary, but most advocate specific ideas and share or debate points around their area of interest. • Most bloggers do write to make friends, because nurturing these relationships can potentially increase their presence, reach, and perception of expertise. • Some bloggers are influenced by select influencers, and the level of transparency is as varied as columnists. Some bloggers are also influenced by others who they never mention. • Most bloggers do not fact check for accuracy or seek additional sources beyond what they can find available on the Web. • Many bloggers do discriminate between the level of expertise and value of insights, often giving more weight to those who have a perceived expertise. For some specific suggestions, see the extended post.