In Matt's piece on Iowa nurses he made the following comaprision.
"The dynamic reminded me of the hostility that a lot of journalists feel towards bloggers, seeing us as competitors rather than as a resource that can improve their work."
Love the blogosphere but 99.9% of bloggers are not journalists by any stretch of the imagination.
If we define journalists as reporters trained to investigate the facts, check and confirm those facts and have third party (editors) monitor the process to make sure the story is accurate and factual, probably only 75% of the news media meets that criteria.
Much of the traditional media today consists of opinion and commentary, not journalism (Fox News for example), and that would describe the bloggers.
The example of Matt's story on Iowa nurses was really an interview and Matt's opinions. Informative and interesting but commentary not journalism.
The example of Fox News trying to smear Obama and Clinton with the "Madrassa" story is another example of opinions and commentary masked as news and journalism.
I think that's where the "hostility" of journalists to bloggers comes in...the journalists have to get multiple sources, confirm the source's story, fact check, sell it their editor who grills them on the facts and content while bloggers just have to blog.
If bloggers were journalists then the blogs would look more like the online version of a newspaper. As it is, material that appears on blogs is assumed to not be fact checked, not confirmed, not passing any kind of editorial bar...not journalism.
Nothing wrong with that, blogs are great places for people to discuss the issues and serves a purpose of creating community discussion of issues that has been lost. But journalism it's not.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 6 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.