Print This Post Print This Post

Jan

15

Blogger-journalist osmosis: suggestions good, but wrong basic premise?


This Poynter Institute E-media Tidbit contains valuable insights for everyone who writes about news, but I don’t agree with the implicit exclusion of bloggers from the category of journalist. Read it and decide for yourself.

Here is the very true part, especially if you accept the divide as an accurate portrait of the current landscape:

From these examples [in the article], I would make these distinctions between MSM and bloggers — something Colorado journalists seem anxious to do these days concerning state government coverage:

  • Journalists take deadlines seriously, as Rovnak points out, and generally report better. (Aren’t they supposed to by definition?) However, Leonsis would argue with that: “I am constantly amazed at how silly this cycle is: someone reports badly; someone comments on the bad reporting; there are now two sources out there; it must be true; so now it is fact.”
  • Bloggers generally demonstrate more passion for their subject, which is why less discerning readers — fans in many instances — may prefer blogs.

Mainstream media would be better served by more passion, even at the cost of some objectivity. Blogging would be better served by better reporting, although access often limits the extent to which a blogger can gather information. But as reporting and blogging continue to merge, both would be well served to remember what makes the other successful.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:23 am January 15th, 2008 in Blogging, Media 

Comments

Leave a Reply




"));