chrisbrogan.com - Latest Comments in Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Waleed Raza — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 09:16:33 -0000

As both a freelance journalist and a blogger, I see the difference as sort of a Venn diagram, where all journalists can be bloggers but not all bloggers can be journalists. For me the difference is, as you alluded to, sourcing and reporting. I would never turn in a news story that I hadn't reported, because most of the information about the story would be coming not from my own knowledge but from that of the people I interview directly and the research I do. I know there are bloggers out there who do a lot of research and interviews, but it's not the norm, in my experience. Secondary sourcing usually seems to be perfectly acceptable, which I would be loathe to accept as a journalist or as the editor of a journalist.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

video downloader free download — Mon, 06 Dec 2010 09:58:36 -0000

Some bloggers tend to work with journalistic standards in mind. Others are trained journalists. Still more are professional journalists have come into blogging out of necessity.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

yuregininsesi — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 15:03:42 -0000

Last night I chose to unplug early, but before I did I read your blog and as I ritually do I wrote out my thoughts.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Pes 2011 İndir — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:01:24 -0000

www.pes-2011.blogcu.com

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Cografya — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 13:00:59 -0000

www.cografyaokulu.net

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Cografya Dersi — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 12:58:56 -0000

great a site

www.cografyadersanesi.blogs...

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

porno izle — Sun, 23 May 2010 11:25:24 -0000

It is. And the link to the very unethical blog done by the GQ journalist ought to show this well.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

film izle — Fri, 14 May 2010 17:54:59 -0000

They always could. The only difference now is that everyone's got access to the megaphone, and some even have amps and mics. Some are drawing a crowd, and some are simply catering to the small minority that is the peanut gallery. But it's still just folks wanting a platform to sound byte something about something to anybody who will listen.

The main difference, who would you buy a ticket to see standing on that soapbox? And would content be enough? Would the size of the crowd matter? Would their experience? dizi izle Training?

There are so many factors that come into play when deciding just what voice we actually care to hear...who cares if it's a journalist or blogger?

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

teknoloji haberleri — Fri, 14 May 2010 11:14:22 -0000

gain, I just believe the main point regarding the issue is, and will remain accreditation.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

seks — Thu, 13 May 2010 17:02:20 -0000

Chris, you are right, it doesnt matter and both is good.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Richardatdell — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 00:18:17 -0000

some great additional perspectives, thanks for that.

In some respects, Chris, you are right, it doesnt matter and both is good.

I just wanted to speak up for bloggers who write what they think, feel and believe with no notion of being the "journalist"...and I think that is very powerful in its own right.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

NEENZ — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 23:38:14 -0000

Chris:

Last night I chose to unplug early, but before I did I read your blog and as I ritually do I wrote out my thoughts.

I wanted to share them with you and your readers: http://www.faleafine.com/?p=26

Aloha,
NEENZ

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Elizabeth Grattan — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 20:59:16 -0000

I'm still pushing for accreditation. As I mentioned on the twitter page:

...all opinions are pressed down and poured out for good measure…weighted regardless. as it should be. accreditation matters.

Shava: I respectfully disagree. The difference between a columnist and a blogger spans beyond pay. There really is a process of proving credibility and audience...and of course, revenue being generated.

And I wouldn't consider "readers" editors. Ever.

Again, I just believe the main point regarding the issue is, and will remain accreditation.

Con von Hoffman is spot on when stating this dilemma as a false dichotomy. It is. And the link to the very unethical blog done by the GQ journalist ought to show this well.

That journalist was granted the interview based on his credentials as a journalist. Not a blogger. That he blogged in addition didn't change that. (while certainly unethical on the part of the journalist and naive on the part of the person being interviewed).

Nothing has changed much in this discussion but for the means men (and women) are reaching an audience. Anyone who wants to stand on a soap box can. They always could. The only difference now is that everyone's got access to the megaphone, and some even have amps and mics. Some are drawing a crowd, and some are simply catering to the small minority that is the peanut gallery. But it's still just folks wanting a platform to sound byte something about something to anybody who will listen.

The main difference, who would you buy a ticket to see standing on that soapbox? And would content be enough? Would the size of the crowd matter? Would their experience? Training?

There are so many factors that come into play when deciding just what voice we actually care to hear...who cares if it's a journalist or blogger?

The journalist does. The blogger ought to.

Or they might as well step down from their soapbox and save the mic for those who actually feel they have something important to say....

imo.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Jennifer Leggio — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:12:50 -0000

I think all of our comments have just supported Chris' initial comment of "who cares?" Just within this blog, there are at least five definitions of blogger and journalist, and both are equally subjective. Well, maybe journalist a little less subjective than blogger.

I do feel, however, that regardless of your title -- whether it be blogger, journalist, analyst or monkey trainer -- if you voice your opinion in a public medium you hold YOURSELF to a certain level of credibility. Someone earlier said that journalists are more research focused whereas bloggers are more opinionated. True, but there's nothing stopping bloggers from doing their own research and ensuring that they are wrapping their blogs around facts. Dave Fleet made an excellent point in a blog the other day that explored the accountability of bloggers (http://fleetstreetpr.com/20... and he makes an excellent point.

I think, over time, it's not going to be a "who will survive game" between journalists and bloggers. It will be a situation in which the most credible, research-focused and timely news communicators will remain at the top -- whether they are bloggers or journalists. The only question in that is, what is the vehicle if the imbalanced media outlets eventually are driven out of print?

This is a bit more tangential than I would've liked, but I'm going to own it. Regardless, I think the lessons of Michael J. Parenti (http://www.michaelparenti.o... apply in every case. And that is, in the end the readers decide who has the loudest voice, the corporations and advertisers be damned.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Jennifer Van Grove — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:15:55 -0000

This is an interesting subject given the ethical question that Mark Cuban posits on his blog.
http://www.blogmaverick.com...

He was interviewed by a journalist for GQ who happens to also blog for Valleywag. Long story short, Cuban's PO'd that the guy used interview material for GQ on the Valleywag blog.
http://valleywag.com/347396...

The guy in question doesn't seem to think he did anything wrong. Who's right? Does it matter?

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Darren Daz Cox — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:51:29 -0000

one thing I like about blogs over 'news sources' is that I can usually comment without having to join a certain community or group. I'm done having to sign up and be on a mailing list just to leave a comment.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Shava Nerad — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:24:03 -0000

Albert says: "A true editor’s goal it is to get the facts right, or to see that a story may be balanced."

I teach media literacy to 7th to 12th graders. They're savvy kids, well before I get to them. These kids don't believe in facts in the same way their elders do. They know that statistics are manipulated, that facts are reported selectively, that the criteria for comparisons are often apples and oranges. They don't believe in one balanced or factual story. They believe in comparing multiple sources.

My job tends to be to convince them that civic engagement still has meaning in this largely free-floating, relativistic, postmodern world of theirs.

I don't think that the next generation of media consumers is going to find your definition of editor as a critical differentiation between establishment and civic media.

As to fact checking, these are the same kids who assume that wikipedia has their facts straight because so many people with interests in a topic check and modify its content. It gives a whole new meaning to consensus reality.

Editorial control and fact checking will not sell this generation on corporate media -- rather the opposite. For good or ill.

My first real paycheck was from a newspaper -- I've written for a half dozen or so, and none of my editors had much issue with the quality of my work. None of them were "larger" media, and none of them had more than cursory fact checking.

If I could, what I'd do was create a social blogging site with newsroom resources (fact checking, research, librarian) for bloggers-by-invitation and bloggers-by-rating. And we'd provide resources to educate young bloggers in journalistic standards and ethics.

You're right, bloggers do miss newsroom resources, and even more *education*. But most of the young newsroom staff today are being hired with marcom, not journalism backgrounds (anecdotally, admittedly, from professionals at the last Media Giraffe conference).

Journalists tend to dismiss bloggers as expressing opinion. But they respect columnists as experts. What's the difference between my blog and a NYT columnist? Pay.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Albert Maruggi — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:43:31 -0000

Shava Nerad

I don't necessarily buy the idea that a reader is an editor. A true editor's goal it is to get the facts right, or to see that a story may be balanced. In larger media organizations they also have fact checkers.

Readers may have agendas and those are hidden and not transparent. the fact that someone has a different point of view or can site where there is an error in your blog post does not make it transparent.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Con von Hoffman — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:39:41 -0000

Thoughts from an actual sometime journalist:

This is a false dichotomy.

A blog is a medium, not a type of writing.
Someone is a blogger because they write in a blog.
It is unfortunate that we now consider a blogger as some different type of writer than one who works on paper or elsewhere.

Writing in a blog can be as neutral and as fact-based as what we hope for in other forms of journalism or it can be as opinionated and non-fact-based as it wants -- or it can be somewhere in between

Whatever it is, it depends on building trust with the reader. That trust comes in a number of different ways. If you want to be known as a reliable source than you make your writing as accurate and fact-based as you can. On the other hand, I have a blog where I make fun of things -- news events, business, marketing -- I build trust with my readers by being funny. I make it very clear that what they are getting is opinion only inadvertently laced with facts.

The big difference between a journalist with credentials and someone who doesn't have those credentials is this:

The former has a branded venue and was hired to work there because his or her employer thinks he or she has the needed expertise to write for them. The latter is a writer who works without someone else’s brand certification.

Being a long-time journalist, it's not surprising that I have a bias in favor of brand certified writers. However, I do not think that certification means a writer is either better or worse than someone without it. It just means he or she is more experienced. Journalists make a lot of mistakes and people who are not or have not been paid to be journalists find and tell a lot of very good, fact-based stories.

The wonderful thing about this interwebs with all its tubes and blogs is now everyone has a chance to find an audience for their writing. A lot of people are also finding out what journalists have a lot of experience with -- your credibility is your most important asset and it is always on the line.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Shava Nerad — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:34:05 -0000

Daz -- Technically, a journalist is someone who researches a story, but most journalists are using no more than the available open sources I use when researching a blog article. I have called news sources, attended press conferences, and done all the bits a journalist would do.

I do not, as someone pointed out, have an editor. However, I would tend to say that my *readers* are my editors -- if I get something wrong, it's far more transparent in the comment stream than it would be in a 1/4 column inch correction or letters to the editor days later.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Darren Daz Cox — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:22:08 -0000

I think the difference should be that journalists report the facts from as many sides as they can seek out on a story and bloggers give their opinion of the story with as many facts and links to related opinions.

Once upon a time a professional journalist was a respected and often ethical seeker of stories to present to a public that demanded honesty above all. Perhaps, as Jello Biafra says, we are just nostalgic for an era that never really happened.

The role of 'journalist' has changed in this modern world of corporate owned mega-media. Now the 'journalist' is told what side to present the story from and people like Ted Turner admit that they write with the advertiser in mind rather than the public.

Even the government has been busted with presenting 'propaganda' as 'journalism' and many 'news' stories are not written by journalists at all but by corporate copywriters and then given to news sources to read or print as if it was written by a journalist.

But in terms of semantics, a journalist is one who reports on a story (presumably after researching it) and a blogger is someone who writes in a blog. A journalist can be a blogger but a blogger isn't necessarily a journalist.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Jim Duncan — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:04:19 -0000

Interesting topic. What happens if a blogger, acting as a "journalist" investigates something about a company, discovers something through an anonymous source and then is compelled, should that blogger have traditional journalistic protections?

I would argue that bloggers' biases are generally more transparent than those of news organizations. Sure, everyone knows that the New York Times and Fox News have their own set, but do they disclose them themselves, or do the bloggers hold them in check and make the disclosures for them through discovery?

Some bloggers are journalists, some journalists are bloggers and some journalists have no business calling themselves either.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

John Wall — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:21:53 -0000

The link would help....
http://www.themshow.com/wor...

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

John Wall — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:19:38 -0000

I just wrote a couple of days ago about how old school journalists are the best poised to succeed in the blogosphere if they can get over their fear/hatred of it.

Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares

Shava Nerad — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 07:42:50 -0000

Some journalists tend to be defensive because the quality of blogging is so variable and the tent is so big. Is LJ a blog that could be compared with Huffington Post as journalistic content?

But my standard reposte to journalists who tell me that blogging isn't journalistic because the standards are so variable is to point them at the tens of thousands of small town newspapers now on the web.

Talk about variability and lack of standards!

These small papers used to be invisible to the journalistic elite. But now they make the idea of online newspaper as broad a category, in quality, as blog. Many include not much more than wire reports, opinion, and gossip.

Placeblogging arose to try to *improve* the quality of local reporting.

So it depends where you live on the food chain, I suppose.