One is what the blog format enables that traditional publishing doesn't support. Those are things like having real-time feedback and comments, being able to version and making the blog post interactive, rather than a static document. Another element to the format is a lack of gatekeepers, so it can be quickly disseminated and disseminated by anyone, so there aren't barriers to participation in the scientific discourse.
Another is norms and expectations. In blogging, it is more the norm that data and code are open. Open is still possible in traditional publishing; it just isn't yet the norm. A new format however, enables new norms and it's easier to set them from the start, than try to revise existing ones.
Finally, there's the element of 'correctness'. Going through peer review and being in a traditional journal certainly doesn't ensure that the paper is correct. You can just look at retractions to see that http://retractionwatch.com/2011/08/11/is-it-time-for-a-retra.... However it would be interesting to see more evidence around whether the blog format does ultimately lead to more 'correct' conclusions, on the whole, and not just for the posts that lead to a lot of discussion.
There are a few elements they emphasize.
One is what the blog format enables that traditional publishing doesn't support. Those are things like having real-time feedback and comments, being able to version and making the blog post interactive, rather than a static document. Another element to the format is a lack of gatekeepers, so it can be quickly disseminated and disseminated by anyone, so there aren't barriers to participation in the scientific discourse.
Another is norms and expectations. In blogging, it is more the norm that data and code are open. Open is still possible in traditional publishing; it just isn't yet the norm. A new format however, enables new norms and it's easier to set them from the start, than try to revise existing ones.
Finally, there's the element of 'correctness'. Going through peer review and being in a traditional journal certainly doesn't ensure that the paper is correct. You can just look at retractions to see that http://retractionwatch.com/2011/08/11/is-it-time-for-a-retra.... However it would be interesting to see more evidence around whether the blog format does ultimately lead to more 'correct' conclusions, on the whole, and not just for the posts that lead to a lot of discussion.