Blogging is not "action" as we normally think of action. It is a form of communication. This communication takes as many forms as there are writers, and it is generally reflective of the individual writer's style. That is largely because bloggers don't have to conform to a "house style" or "house standards" the way writers for hire do. This is the double edged sword of blogging. I know that pretty much every blogger I have ever read has had to retract/clarify/apologize for something at some point. At the same time, this kind of direct downloading from someone's brain can provide fresher, more interesting ways of communicating.
We tend to separate communication and action into two separate activities. They are, however, intertwined. And while it is useful to remind people that concrete action is needed on top of communication, dismissing attempts to communicate because they are not in themselves action enough is counterproductive. We need people dreaming aloud, theorizing, making the case, starting the discussion just like we need people in the metaphorical streets gettin' shit done. Hopefully, some of us will do both. Perhaps the conversation/action ratio is off right now, but if it is, the answer is more action, not less conversation and more action.
No one really knows what the impact of theatre blogging is on Theatre as an art form or institution. In politics, we can look at things like dollars raised, or interviews with politicians done, or scandals created or researched and say "ah, yes, here it is! the impact!". I can explain in concrete terms how Talking Points Memo impacts politics, I cannot explain in concrete terms what Parabasis' impact on theatre is. This does not make keeping the blog pointless. If nothing else, it has connected me with my readers, and i have discovered numerous people, thinkers and artists whom I would not otherwise know. For that, I am grateful.
On a final note, one major tension that runs throughout blogging is the tension between individual and community. Blogs are not forums... they are not a group of people writing on equal terms, but rather one rather loud voice that invites commentary from other voices whose volume is turned down. I struggle with whether or not that's really the form I want my writing to take, but for now... it is. At the same time, what makes most blogs really valuable is the interplay between blogger and reader/commenter. And this tension interplays with what I was talking about earlier. Individuals don't accomplish much. Groups, on the other hand, do. And the way blogs can fit into that has to do with communicating via the individual voice into the group, hoping that something might come of it. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. I couldn't begin to figure out how or why or what makes the difference between those times.