In Defense of Blog Controversy

More than once, I have been charged with using this site to generate controversy, to stir the pot,  to rock the boat, upset the apple cart, and challenge the status quo. I plead guilty as charged. With a caveat:

• I believe controversy generates blog traffic.
• I want traffic.

But I also believe this:

• Some controversy is a reflection of our own bubble.

During my ministerial years, I once preached a sermon discussing the long-term effects of childhood molestation. I discussed how, if the issue is not addressed, a person may never learn how to trust and potentially develop warped concepts of sex and their own sexuality. I talked about the need for honesty, confession, forgiveness, and the grace of God to heal. After the service, a couple approached me to announce they were leaving the church. That subject, they said, was far too personal to be speaking about publicly. The woman then admitted that she had been molested as a child.

Did I overstep my bounds? Was the subject really too personal to address during a Sunday service? Perhaps. Yet I couldn’t help but feel that the “controversy” was more on their end than mine.

I feel that way about a lot of the “controversy” generated here.

While I rarely address issues as sensitive as molestation on this blog, I also don’t shy away from similarly touchy subjects. And being this is primarily a Christian writing blog, many of the “controversial” issues I address have to do with Christian fiction, the Christian publishing industry, Christian art, and related theological intersections.

Which is where the bubble comes in.

When I started blogging (back in ’05), I quickly learned that the Christian writing community is fairly tight and, in some respects, rather insular. (And, did I mention, touchy?) There are lots of taboo subjects in Christian writer’s circles. One of my first salvos (Jan. ’06) was to simply question why Christian reviewers don’t give out more critical reviews. Is that a “controversial” subject? I didn’t think so. Boy, was I wrong!

Over the last five years, I’ve returned to that subject time and again. I have alienated some readers, angered others while addressing topics like sex in Christian fiction, language restrictions, demographic tilts, moralistic guidelines, artistic integrity, theological murkiness, etc.  So why keep addressing these “controversial” issues? Why risk readership for stirring the pot? Simply put, I think the subjects are relevant and not publicly discussed enough.

So should a blogger intentionally try to be controversial, crude, provocative, nay-saying, and in-your-face just to get hits? It’s a bad tactic. Unless you have something of substance to say, you can’t build a significant long-term readership (unless you’re aspiring to be the next TMZ). Readership built around sensationalism and scandal is fleeting.

But not all controversy is substance-less.

Dissent often appears controversial. Going against the grain sometimes seems provocative. Honesty can be offensive. Heck, sometimes even the Truth can seem scandalous!

Especially if you’re in a bubble.

So is this post a further attempt to rock the boat? Hm. Maybe it depends on what boat you’re in…