This is why I’ve always been skeptical to the idea of blogging for a living:

A growing work force of home-office laborers and entrepreneurs, armed with computers and smartphones and wired to the hilt, are toiling under great physical and emotional stress created by the around-the-clock Internet economy that demands a constant stream of news and comment.

The health risk is not the only reason, though. Paid blogging as it is portrayed in the New York Times story, sounds to me more like round-the-clock news agency reporting or the assembly-line-style breaking news production at news websites. Blogging as it should be is — for me — something else completely: taking new ideas and thoughts for a test-drive, experimenting with writing in a loose and unpretentious and informal way that is impossible in a paid environment, even taking days off from blogging if I don’t feel that I have anything to say there and then. Actually, it’s a way of escaping from tedious work, so it’s really ironic if people substitute the assembly line for the sweatshop!

24/7 blogging about something you’re very interested in can be fun for a while, as several sources note in the NYT story, but then you have to earn your living in another way — and return to “free” blogging.