Journalists VERSUS Bloggers

In order to be able to judge the importanceof both blogs and journalism in today's world and their relation, let's go back in history and see what happened when blogging first came up and how the situation developed until today.

This post my summary of the following book (direct citation is quoted with page and line):

Rosenberg, Scott:
Say everything. How Blogging Began, What It's Becoming, and Why It Matters (2009)

To the book: http://www.sayeverything.com/

The author:
Scott Rosenberg is a writer, editor and Web site builder. He was co-founder of Salon and is currently working on MediaBugs. Rosenberg is maintaining the blog Wordyard.

To Scott Rosenberg’s blog: http://www.wordyard.com/

We have to be aware that Scott Rosenberg's point of view is biased towards blogger - he himself doesn't claim to be neutral. Just keep that in mind while reading. We'll see the other side later!


Chapter 9: Journalists vs. Bloggers


The history of the debate “Journalists vs. Bloggers”

Period 1:

Bloggers shoot against journalists - journalists don’t take bloggers seriously
- from the start, the driving force in blogging has been animus against the press
- at first, media doesn’t respond in kind
- journalists publish a handful of articles about blogging noting the arrival
of this new Web form with approval or even amusement
-they ignore the bloggers’ anger at their profession because
“nobody reads blogs” anyway


Period 2:

Journalists secretly start following blogs
- many journalists read the Jim Romenesko’s blog called Media News
- getting a link from Romenesko is very welcome among journalists
- nevertheless they regard his work as low-status activity as he is an
“aggragator” (compiling links to material on others’ websites) and not a
producer
- editors get a lot of information about their own field from blogs

Period 3:

Journalists’ interest shifts into belittlement
- in the early 2000s the professional self-respect of journalists suffers from a
series of blows (newspaper publishing has been in a decline for several years,
circulation numbers are drifting down…)
- newspapers’ websites begin to replace lost profits from the print editions
- editors find their authority questioned and their work challenged by bloggers
- journalists feel kicked by the bloggers when they are already down
many answer with hostility


That’s when the debate “Journalists vs. Bloggers” was triggered off


Endless debates

- editors have the ability to declare “This argument is at an end”, it’s their job
to say “And now this”
- bloggers are under no obligation to follow such orders, they are following
their own news cycle, nothing can stop them to post about a topic
this characteristics of blogging is a profound irritant to editors, in the
journalists’ eyes, bloggers just don’t know when to stop

“Is blogging journalism”?

- this question is not raised from the side of the bloggers but by the journalists
- other questions: “Who gets to call themselves a journalist?” “Who should
readers trust?” “Which group fulfills democracy’s need for reliable public
information better?” “If the Web was killing newspapers, could the new
medium fill the gap?”


Rosenberg’s opinion: “Blogging could be journalism anytime the person writing a blog chose to act like a journalist – recording and reacting to events of the day, asking questions and seeking answers, checking facts and fixing errors. Similarly, journalists could become bloggers anytime (…). (p.274, l.2-6)


The conflict:

- on the surface: it’s about accuracy, objectivity and similar matters of practice
- underneath: it’s over standing, rights and respects – matters of identity
- the rise of blogs exposes how porous the line between “journalists” and “non-
journalists” really is

“Citizen journalism” and “user generated content” (middle of the 2000s)

-media companies come up with these terms to describe new forms of amateur
reporting
- some bloggers are ill-informed and unlikely to threaten traditional journalism,
but many others are experts willing to post about their fields around the clock
and in greater depth than commercial publications
- bloggers begin to prove that they are not only offering opinion or
commentary
- some bloggers hope to boost their professional reputation or sell stuff, but
many others are motivated by the sheer delight of it
- some are ensconced in their fields and securely employed, others are
self-appointed

Bloggers have advantages:

- they are often more passionate than journalists who have become bored of
their working routine with the years
- bloggers don’t work within limits , they have all the time in the world for their
accounts
- the Web delivers information in a timelier and more convenient way and
costs advertisers much less
- bloggers provide both an alternative to the journalists’ work and a channel for
criticism of that work

Journalists are forced to enter blogosphere (latter part of the 2000s):

- they finally figure that they can’t get away with hasty summaries and
overgeneralization that many of them have been practicing for a long time
- many employers make their journalist writing for a blog to boost traffic on
their websites
- blogs, with their frequent updates, comments and links, have proven more
effective at attracting online readers than simply adopted articles from print
- but: for many of these journalists, blogging was an added duty, piled on top of
all the work they already had
it was mostly nothing but an institutional edict, a matter of desperation

“Self-inflicted cannibalism” (John Darnton):

- in some respects, the Web is an attractive distribution medium for newspaper
publishers, they can safe costs for trucks and paper
- but: they have a hard time winning their share of the booming Web
advertising market
- when editors figure by 2000 they should have charged readers for access to
their Websites, it is already too late
- news organizations that then tried to require payment for their newspaper
content fail, their readers simply go elsewhere

Journalists see themselves as victims:

- their resentment against bloggers goes beyond simpl puzzlement over why
they are writing for free
- how can bloggers undermine secure high-paying jobs to that extent?
- the editors deny any responsibility for their economic fate

The curmudgeons among the journalists keep on fighting:

- the decade advances and the presses credibility and popularity, as well as its
financial prospects are very low, its leaders and employees dispirited
- only the curmudgeons among the journalists claim the tenet of professional
journalism to be irreplaceable
- they try to defend their bundle of “objective” attributes: impartiality, on-
the-one-hand-but-on-the-other-hand “balance” and the impersonal voice
- but: these virtues have been shaped by the business needs of the publishing
and broadcasting industry for a long time

“Blogging can never replace journalism!”

- having ended the controversy “Is blogging journalism?” with a “no”, the
curmudgeons now favor this argument
- but: bloggers never desired neither to replace journalism nor to serve as a
substitute
- most bloggers see the relationship with traditional media as symbiotic
- but: they don’t try to save journalism either, bloggers are quite indifferent to
the turmoil in the journalism business
- that’s what appalls the curmudgeons the most: don’t these bloggers see the
risk of journalism disappearing?

Traditionalists arguments for journalism/against blogging:

- investigative accounts:
- only media companies’ subsidies make expensive and politically dangerous
work possible
- but: always little guarantee of results and in hard times too risky, anyway
- online news consumption locks us into an echo chamber
- readers only follow the links they are interested in, lose the experience of
stumbling upon little stories they didn’t know they wanted to read, get to
hear only what they already know
- but: the Web generates an oversupply of fascinating novelties and
distractions

Scott Rosenberg’s conclusion:

“You could just attend to the traditional media’s periodic check-ins on these unfolding controversies (…). But you would barely scratch the surface of the issues. Or you could dive into the profusion of posts in which the debate has actually taken place. “ (p.299, l.21-26)

“If you care about the fate of journalism and its role in democracy and culture, this second choice turns out to be the only satisfying option. “ (p.300, l.3f.)

“In this controversy (…) to ignore bloggers is to miss the entire event.” (l.6f.)

“Rather than one tidy ‘unifying narrative’, it provides a noisy arena, open to everyone, for the collective working out of old conflicts and new ideas.” (l.9ff.)