Blog Straight Talk
Smackdown: Journalism Versus Blogging
Posted by geoliv • 10/01/07 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS]
Topics: blogging, buzz bin, copywrite, ethics, inc., journalism, now is gone
Much has been said about journalism versus blogging and the approach of the two media forms. Are they the same, are they different? Has new media completely destroyed the lines of difference? A lot of bloggers fancy this to be the truth.
In some ways this is true. The boundaries between publishing mechanisms have been destroyed. There are real bonafide electronic journals using blog platforms (for example TMZ , albeit tabloid) and writers in traditional media that throw out objectivity and act like ranting bloggers (Advertising Age’s Jonah Bloom and Rush Limbaugh come to mind). Some publications like ESPN encourage conversation after their stories, and some bloggers like Seth Godin just write a daily column with no comments.
But in the end is the journalistic piece the same as a blog entry? Is a journalist really a blogger and vice versa? I think not. Why?
A journalist has completely different writing mission. First of all, it’s their paid occupation. Secondly, they engage in some sort of thought and research to deliver a popular slant in a print, audio or video format. Their writing is not scholarly writing, but most trained journalists research and deliver a balanced point of view.
A blogger (or columnist) writes or records a conversational opinion piece that waxes poetic on a point. This opinion style of writing is often not grounded in facts, is not researched, and does not have multiple sources. It’s from the heart. In some cases, blogger opinion takes the form of emotionally charged rant.
Journalism was dubbed the Fourth Estate, a means of keeping the government in line. Yet journalism has lost a lot of power because of its inaccuracies. Conversely, bloggers have now arisen to become the Fifth Estate, and police the media. But the expectation of a journalist – who is not a scientist or scholar working for years on a singular point of view – to deliver 100 percent truth is out of line. The reality is that most journalists do a better job of exploring the facts than an opinionated blogger shooting his/her mouth off!
It’s good that we have more checks and balances in place. But blogging voices will never supplant the role of a journalist. The NY Times of the world will always have a place. In the end, while we detest unchecked authoritative voices, we still crave the structure of Real Journalism.
(OK, I'm going to shut up and watch the stream of fury now!)
User Comments
-
I just read a piece of research by a/o Stephen D. Reese (Journalism, Vol. 8, No. 3, 235-261 (2007) © 2007 SAGE Publications) called "Mapping the blogosphere".
The summary is:
"Globalization and the internet have created a space for news and political discourse that overrides geography and increases opportunities for non-mainstream, citizen-based news sources. Drawing a distinction between emerging citizen and professional media, this study examines one rapidly expanding and increasingly influential citizen news source — weblogs. We analyzed the linking patterns, the online network led to by six of the most popular news and political weblogs to study their relationship to other weblogs and the traditional professional news media in the USA and internationally. Findings suggest a more complementary relationship between weblogs and traditional journalism and less echo-chamber political insularity than typically assumed. The blogosphere relies heavily on professional news reports and half of its linked-to sites can be considered non-partisan."-
Exactly. But also, this development will really change the relationship between bloggers and journalists--to a more complementary one. And this will change the role of blogging. From a role where bloggers are mainly linking to items in the traditional media to the other way around, I am sure. Many bloggers will be 'citizen-journalists' as well. And then there is the huge impact of User Created Content activity, that will also impact the role of traditional journalism.
-
-
Recently, on CSPAN there was the discussion of YearlyKos which by means of the various bloggers present a case was made that indeed Blogs are a journalistic endeavor. We just have to decide how serious we want to be with our reporting and make sure we get as many citations as possible. We can keep up with Traditional Print Journalists, we just lack their reservoir of resources. Give us time and we will catch up. We just need to build our own world of contacts before we can really do our own work, instead of linking 90 percent of the time to traditional news organizations. -
I have to agree with kystorms. I don't have all the resources I need so I also end up linking to a lot of other sources. Perhaps it's the kind of blogs I have that make it difficult. I am serious about what I cover but I'm not the first to get any news. Frankly, people can label me any way they choose and I won't take offense because I do have a mission and I will carry on regardless. -
Bloggers and journalists are not defined by the medium. They are defined by style.
-
I've been busy of late and only just got into this thread today.
Being both a journalist and a blogger (I blog for my employer's website), they are two entirely different things.
Of course, my blogging is mostly centered on television and I generally am under no obligation to be unbiased and can express my opinions to my heart's content. Don't like an episode? I can say it. Someone acts horribly? I can say it. A show bites? My opinion. Deal with it. Love a show? I can promote it all I want (Jericho guest blogs, for example!).
I think, though, that there's a great disconnect in most people's minds as to what is what.
Drudge, for example, is a blogger, not a journalist. He primarily links to other people's work, though he does come up with some of his own original content. He does reporting in digging up that content, but the vast majority of his work is scanning the web for stories to link to. I'm not saying that's a bad thing by any means. A link on Drudge is worth a lot of traffic.
But a journalist is someone who spends his or her time reporting and then writing what he or she has reported on. Journalists publish (in print or digitally, no matter the format) their own original work. I sometimes think of Jane as a Jericho journalist, as everything she posts on the Monster blog is original content and it's definitely reported. It's a little different, though, because it's more in the Charlie Rose theme of the Q&A. So she's an interviewer, not specifically a journalists. All journalists are interviewers, not all interviewers are journalists.
I think the main difference - whether people want to believe this of the mainstream media or not - is that journalists do attempt to be unbiased and to get at the truth. Do they get things wrong? Sure. They are, after all, only human. But I've never met a journalist who went out of his or her way to inject his or her opinion into his or her work. There have been occasions where reporters have temporarily forgotten, but their editors have always caught it, in my experience.
Bloggers, however, often write in a way that implies they are telling the truth when they are merely expressing opinion. Statistics (Three kinds of lies, remember: Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics) and "facts" can be found to back up anyone's assertion, no matter how spurious. Some bloggers are very open about the bias they are writing from. Others, not so much.
I feel like I'm rambling now, so I'll stop for the moment....-
Amen.
-
To bias I would add voice.
-
Ah, Dane, there is a difference between Bias and Objectivity. And yes, all journalists are biased about certain things in some way or another (most of the time, not in the way we're accused of, however), but they do attempt at all costs not to let that bleed into the writing. People have a right to learn the truth from a newspaper, and that's what we try to provide. Do we always succeed? No. Do we try? Damn straight. And I've seen many, many reporters writing stories that "appear" (according to our readers) to be biased in exactly the opposite direction of the reporter's own personal biases. We hate hypocrisy, whether it's from someone who shares our personal belief system or not.
-
-
Thanks Amy. Jericho Journalist? That is something I can certainly live with.
-
I thought you'd like that, Jane. ;-)
-
-
I just don't think bloggers are able to see they are not journalists and that they fantacize to be equal. They are not. I've been both, and there are distinct styles. Outside of our little bubble almost any business person in their right mind would agree with me. Social media style is conversational and opinion oriented -- as is a column. News coverage - a.ka. journalism -- when done correctly, is not.
And no matter how many times you tell me the grass is purple, my eyes see green. That's my last comment on this one. Cya. -
Hat tip to Rich.
-
Might I suggest that neither journalists nor bloggers can be adequately understood in terms of definitions? How one understands the terms will depend largely on the specific context in which one uses the terms. Sure, there is a reasonably clear delineation in terms of medium, but that is about it.
-
I think that's an excellent point.
Frankly, one of the biggest issues in the news business these days is figuring out exactly what and who we are. That's why Gannett, the company I work for, has transformed its "newsrooms" into "information centers." Now, outside the usual grumbling about having to rename everything with snappy jargon (old media is not immune from this business practice, I sadly report), I haven't heard anyone come up with a good reason why that is not a more accurate description. We gather and disperse information, not just news. We report, write, blog, photograph, record on video and audio, post, print and broadcast.
In the end, what is a journalist _really_? If you'd asked me a few years ago, I could have answered quickly and easily. These days, the answer's not that simple and I think we're still trying to figure it all out.
-
-
I do not consider myself as a journalist in the sense of being a reporter in that I do not go out and gather original source materials or witness events but I do think of myself as a journalist in the sense of being a columnist in that I try to adhere to standards of professionalism and accuracy in the information I post. -
Okay, I am moving this over here although it seems as though this conversation is winding down.
I think Blogger is more like a Genus and Journalist is more like a Species. In this regard you could be a Blogging Journalist.
I think bloggers blog because they are interested in the process of writing and a journalist’s write to unravel. Why can’t they be coupled? If I write songs and put them on my blog am I a songwriter or a blogger. I am a blogging songwriter.
I do not think you have to get paid to consider yourself a journalist and hold yourself accountable to the deadlines, standards and ethical considerations of that moniker.
Blogger = Process + Whatever kind of writer you are. -
A discussion like this one is very interesting, yet necessarily a bit trivial too -- We are comparing two 'things' without having a clear and common definition of both of them. No wonder we conclude that the two are "somewhat similar" and "somewhat different", and that they "somehow" interact.
So maybe the discussion has been helpful in getting a bit closer to a definition of what 'blogging' is, or what 'journalism' is. I think it might be a good next step, if someone would try and compile some working definitions of blogging and journalism from this discussion. Rich?
And then we might be able to take the discussion to a next level, and discuss how we think the one will influence the other and/or vice versa; and even more interesting, maybe, how this development might impact the way 'information' becomes 'influence'? -
Below is an interesting exchange which occured on Sweat 1951's blog regarding whether or not Jericho fans could be considered marketers. Again we have an industry bias where the people who get paid believe they have more right to a title than those who volunteer. Read the full post at this link.
arabellesalley.blogspot.com/2007/10/jericho-fans-guts-and-brilliance.html
Nina(Lentini)Said:
Hi all. I appreciate your enthusiasm for your show, but, as you are not, in fact, marketers, please don't fill up my e-mail with nominations for Marketer of the Year.
Thanks, Nina
October 26, 2007 5:47 AM
Jericho Saved said...
Nina,
I respectfully disagree.
"On July 19, 2007 Nina Tassler spoke at the Television Critics Association semi-annual summer meeting. CBS executives, including Tassler, said it is up to fans to encourage word of mouth for the show. The network won't provide any specific directions or marketing materials, since that discourages word of mouth and viral marketing."
copywriteink.blogspot.com/2007/09/marketing-by-consumers-jericho-bloggers.h... -
That is a good question that Carolina and I got to ask Greg Jarboe at SES-NY 2009 after his keynote speech. We asked him about about Mainstream media verses Blogging and New Media and here is his answer in a video and post we did about SES 2009 from New York.
www.bloggersschool.com/2009/04/03/new-media-vs-mainstream-media-greg-jarboe...
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
