The problem with the term "The New Fiction" is that the fiction will inevitably be old. The same could have been said about the work of any generation of writers.

The Web ultimately is a medium used by real offline people, and as such, it'll probably be whatever we are.

Artists used to argue about art for art's sake versus social realism etc, and now it's like the most dominate argument is related to "art for the market's sake." It's a necessity, somewhat, for some people.

Online writing is supplementary, complementary, another part of the whole, something that's only as important as one's investment in it.

I really wouldn't call a lot of what's online "literature" since that word, to me, refers to a sub-genre of writing that belongs to the heavy-hitters, the canonical writers, Shakespeare, Dante, Milton, Dostoevsky, Kafka, and even Toni Morrison, George Saunders, Thomas Bernhard, Sebald, Borges, DFW, e.g.

There's a ton of good art and music and writing out there offline among a ton of trash, and the same goes with what's online.

I don't have a philosophy. I have an instinct. I accept stuff that I like.