A Washington Post columnist wades into the debate over "what/who is a journalist" with a take on the blogger who tried to "out" Larry Craig. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/05/AR2007090502519.html?hpid=news-col-blog
From high atop his Adams Morgan apartment building, Michael Rogers decides who is living a lie and who may be turning toward righteousness.
Then, with a few words sprayed onto the uneven ground between gossip and journalism, he turns a life upside down. Or he offers absolution, remaining silent if he believes the person in question has a good heart.
This isn't a new debate. Newspaper companies fear losing revenue to the Web and newspaper reporters fear losing readers to it. Bloggers can be a threat.
But beyond that is the more central question Fisher is trying to get at: what is "journalism" and does it deserve higher esteem than blogging?
What do you think? What is it? What kind of regard does it deserve? As I said in lecture, I think challenges to legitimacy are a greater threat to journalism than declining revenues. Are news organizations earning their legitimacy?
Monday, September 10, 2007
"Blogging" vs. "Reporting"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I like how you are nuancing this debate, turning the question on "esteem" and "legitimacy" rather than asking if blogging is journalism. As many of the bloggers and media watchers noted after this WP article ran, that question has been answered. But yours, I think, has not. If we had to answer this question now, I would suggest that "no, bloggers have not earned a higher esteem than journalism yet." Or at least the vast majority of them have not. But we don't have to answer this question yet. Things are still a-changing... What interests me is how journalists are responding to these threats in this strange schizophrenic manner, simultaneously copying them, engaging with them, and debunking/eviscerating them.
Post a Comment