Isaac's writing style IS great, because it keeps me reading and reading, how long the paragraphs may ever be. He is funny and often has some very pointing pictures, comparisons/analogies, is able to keep the balance between fun and seriousness, between private thoughts/feelings and the "official" part, keeps the track when it comes to a general story throughout the complete blog and can write great dialogues, too. Yes, it IS great. He even has a vocabulary that is unmistakable... 
Umm, so it's great because you say so? How can that be an objective measurement? You can find pointing pictures, jokes and nice dialogues in other texts too, are they all great?
Could the development of this thread be the case of some "bashed" professional honour?? It is absolutely not indicated to compare the writing style of any internet blog with any journalistic rules - blogging has no journalistic rules in it. It maybe should have, but look at several ones - there aren't any.
Bashed professional honour? How can you assume that if you, in the very same sentence, say that blogging has no journalistic rules? That is the whole point! It should have. You are right, every John Doe can publish his own blog today and write about cereals or toilet paper, which, as a journalist, I think is already bad enough. There has been a debate going on about quality journalism. It will vanish some day because everybody thinks he can write, and readers think it's great. I write, hence I am? No.
To me, there has to be a certain amount of journalistic quality in any published text (and mind you, he published his blog as a book), and I'm sorry to say that, but Isaac's blog is a nice and entertaining diary, nothing more. Sometimes it cannot hurt to put down your pink fan goggles and look at things in an objective way. As entertaining as the entries might be, they are also narcissistic, often insulting (always complaining about people who can't speak English properly etc etc.) and self-centered. Endless blurps about sandwiches, train rides, hints to his mysterious past to keep the reader's attention because he feels important enough. It would be difficult to publish in any newspaper. The only form I can think of would be a tongue-in-cheek commentary, but a travel report (which it is, somehow)? No way. You have to stay neutral (!) and objective (!), eloquent, descriptive, interesting. That's part of the art (which I certainly don't claim to master) of great writing.
I'm sorry, but that's the way I see it (pun intended).
It's okay if you like it, and I don't want to "bash" - just trying to put things into perspective here.
