Blogs Versus Journalism — I gave a talk at the the WordPress confab with Om Malik on blogs versus jouirnalism. It wasn’t much of a debate since we agreed on almost everything except rating comments. As for bloggers being credentialed as journalists? I see no reason why not if it is done on the same case by case basis as print writers. We have to realize that not every print journalist gets credentialed either.
Here is a reasonable summation of the session and here. More importantly to me a number of issues came up at the meeting which I may have to address in an essay or two. Here are the concepts to mull over: Should journalists be licensed? Should there be a ethics standard for bloggers? How should you or should you even deal with corrections on a blog? In other words what happens to the public record when slipstream changes are made? Should blogs be as protected as newspapers? Are blogs already protected as free speech mechanisms whatever their other status?
Other than that this event, which I have been meaning to attend for years, is loaded with very interesting and talented people at the forefront of this revolutionary change in publishing. I recommend it if you use WordPress.
Curiously the topic of animated cat GIFs was avoided
Still trying, still following up on getting credentialed here in NM. Interesting – and sometimes sticky – discussions with my buds who are “legitimate” journalists: some as print journalists, some working within the official website of a newspaper [and with their own problems at being accepted by their peers].
Not the time or place for details; but, I will update folks when this gets resolved one way or another.
This is interesting juxtapositioned with your article on the Time cover. Why would we think ‘mainstream journalists’ can do it any better then bloggers.
Is there something not right with the idea of bloggers needing to gather in San Fransisco?
Should people who write messages on billboards be given press credentials?
Seems there needs to be a test of some kind. Perhaps starting with the requirement to already having some minimal presence in the MSM. Or maybe a Google ranking.
RBG
RBG
In a certain sense, I think its true that “traditional media” with journalists and all can exist quite nicely WITHOUT the blogosphere, but it is most likely the blogoshere cannot exist without traditional media, – – –
– – – maybe – – –
only bloggers who are also traditional journalists should have such protections==whatever anyone thinks that is?? First Amendment still applies to everyone as long as Cheney is kept busy with his investments.
I think journalists and bloggers should be lumped together and given protection and credentials on an individual basis. Some bloggers have more influence than a guy writing for a local weekly. Much of the credentialing, though, stems from people trying to get into things free, not so they can report. This has to be identified from the outset.
Personally I do not see a difference between bloggers and old newsletter journalists such as IF Stone and George Seldes. Well, except for the fact that there is now a horde.
The vast majority of the media these days is untrustworthy. Almost all are owned by major corporations that do not want to rock the boat. Lots of important stories (like the earlier story about Bush suspending fifth ammendment to war protesters) are completely ignored by the mainstream media.
But the blogosphere is equally untrustworthy simply because these are non-professional journalists. Yet, I do not believe blog writers need to be licensed, but I do believe they are subject to the same laws as journalist (slander, libel, plagarism) but also the same rights of free press, including freedom of speech and source protection.
We have seen multiple cases of bloggers scooping the mainstream press. They keep the media honest, even though they may not have the same size of audience. Good stories will get out.
Individual basis awarding of credentials would be a good idea. Maybe coupled with some kind of test, like if they can pass a fifth-grade final exam. That might weed out not only bogus blogger “journalists”, but some in the MSNBC as well.
There is another aspect of the blogger/journalist debate: oversight.
A journalist usually operates in an environment of editorial oversight. Material is created, then depending on content and topic, fact-checked and edited for grammar and style.
Sadly, in the relentless competitive environment created by the web this distinction is deteriorating as publications streamline staffs and accelerate production to meet the voracious appetite of the public.
The original press, what existed at the time the US Constitution was being written, were the pamphleteers, who had the same credentials as today’s bloggers (that is, “none at all”).
The power to license is the ability to control. “Certify” the press, and censorship is implicit.
What about “responsibility”? By what standard?
I vote “HELL NO!”
Phillipe has a valid point in that the power to license is the power to control. We all know the problems that can arise with the FCC for example, would we really want the goverment or an unaccountable(to the public) Federal agency with that power over the written word as well as the airwaves?
#8, Alix, that is the most important statement so far:
“A journalist usually operates in an environment of editorial oversight.”
Ay, there’s the rub.
Should journalists be licensed?
Unless things have changed over the past few years, it’s the publishers who ‘license’ journalists now and they have always done so by choosing whose writing or photos will be included in a publication and whose will not.
I don’t think that’s ever going to change in any media and I’d hate to see the government become involved in the process. It would be the end of the so-called free press.
An obvious problem arises when all publishers are wealthy and we end up with the same point-of-view in all publications and indeed, all mainstream media. That is happening now with Rupert Murdoch, as it used to happen with Conrad Black, who always replaced professional editors with advertisement salespeople.
‘Ethics’ per se, usually have no connection to mainstream journalism today. “Ethics’ and ‘excellence’ are only important insofar as they attract paying customers.
Since pretty well anyone can run a blog, we’re experiencing a short period of balance in media these days and everyone seems to be shocked by a situation that was once common.
Blogs are speech, so why shouldn’t they be protected by existing laws relating to free speech? In my opinion, the question is only being asked because bloggers are becoming reporters and wealthy publishers have no control over what the populace reports or the publication of their opinions.
14, Are you claiming Murdoch has the largest media empire?
15., No, I don’t know who currently has the largest media empire, although I suppose it might be Rupert. That’s kind of ‘beside my point’ and not central to it – or even important to it.