The local mainstream media is taking another quizzical glance at the "blogging" phenomenon with this article in yesterday's Pioneer Press, about the possisble influence of the medium in the upcoming election cycle.
Cutting room floor disclaimer, despite being interviewed several months ago for nearly an hour by the Pioneer Press reporter, Brady Averill (who at the time, was still a college student and some sort of intern at the Pioneer Press), and despite being uniformly brilliant on all queries, Chad and I didn't even get a one line, out-of-context blurb in the article. Which, I suppose, we should be happy for, based on the experience by Craig Westover.
Craig Westover, who blogs at craig westover.blogspot.com and contributes to the Pioneer Press opinion pages, says he and his fellow bloggers are outworking the traditional media outlets on this big story, devoting more time and attention.
"They're going to eat the newspapers' lunch," Westover said.
Westover is one of the of the most thoughtful and insightful writers in town and to reduce his interview to seven words tells you all you need to know about the worth of this piece of journalism. What exactly was ol' Captain Fishsticks talking about with that quote? Was the lunch quote specifically about fish sticks? We'll never know from reading the article. But we do know he's wrong about whatever he did say. Not only is he taken out of context, he's used as the straw man for the "expert" refutations to come.
Not so fast, others said. Experts say readers typically look at blogs more in line with their own political ideologies, and that reduces their impact.
What that has to do with outworking the traditional media (eating their lunch), I don't know. But I must admit it is fun to gratuitously imply that Westover is wrong. His trivia partners at Keegan's next Thursday night might want to remember that rebuke next time he spouts off: Not so fast, Westover!
And maybe it is hasty to say the Fraters Libertas crew didn't get a mention. Because one of the "experts" cited in the article did have this analysis to contribute:
There are some right-wing blogs that even if you tried to have a conversation with them, it's essentially a bunch of frat guys having a party and doing a beer dance,'' said Michael McIntee, producer for the Inside Minnesota Politics blog and podcast. "And that's not useful; it's pretty much making noise."
Woo hoo, we may have gotten a mention. We'll commence the beer dancing as soon as someone let's us know exactly what that is.
I've never heard of Inside Minnesota Politics, so I'll have to take the reporter's word for it that this McIntee character is an expert ... in something. But it sure isn't the local blogging scene. (And we can rule out drinking beer and dancing as well).
Just who are these noisy "right wing" blogs that won't converse with him? And what "left-wing" blogs are proving to be so noise free and useful to the debate. Neither description meets with my years' long observations of the local blogging scene. In fact, the opposite is a better representation of reality. And you'd think an "expert" in the field would be able to name some names and cite examples. But he doesn't, he sticks with the anonymous slanders. Maybe the reporter left out his expanded remarks or she let him skate without insisting on details. Either way, I echo Hugh Hewitt's words regarding an LA Times writer's recent anonymous, name-calling attack on him:
But if he's going to slander me or some other radio show host again, perhaps he can borrow the spine to do so by name.
This article also exhumes the experts to levy one more common criticism denigrating the significance of blogs:
Along with partisanship, credibility is another problem for blogs. There's nothing in the First Amendment about the need for an editor. Bloggers can write anything they want; they can spout fact or fiction. [U of MN Professor Larry Jacobs] advises readers to beware: "There's no gatekeeping here."
In theory, I agree, having a stern, all-knowing sentry for truth vetting all of our commentary would be of value. And it would save time for all of us who give good faith efforts to do it on our own (which Fraters Libertas, and all Northern Alliance blogs do, with a high degree of reliability). It's true, we don't have that and mistakes are sometimes made. But its delusional to think the MSM doesn't make similar mistakes all the time. Sure, they have people who, in title, are supposed to be gatekeepers. Yet, despite their presence, MSM commonly presents, as fact, such things as forged National Guard memos, Minneapolis police wasting time arresting skinny dippers, no classroom books at Maxfield elementary school, etc. etc., etc.
It's interesting to note that the impression of blogs as less reliable than the MSM is endorsed by another local blogger:
Patrick Timmons, founder of the Minnesota Republican Watch blog, got into blogging for the sake of accuracy. He said he read a statement on a conservative blog that he believed was incorrect. The college student said he won't post anything without researching first.
Another local lefty blog (who I've never heard of) to the rescue!
There are two criticism about blogs levied in this article: 1) We're useless, partisan noisemakers (and available for rent for your New Year's eve party) and 2) we're unreliable because we have no pre-publication editorial review. For both, conservative blogs are employed as the offending examples. And for both, liberal blogs as held up as the sane alternative or remedy. Ah, where's that non-partisanship and that gatekeeper of truth and fairness when we need him.
I suppose it's hard to work in any depth or understanding or balance into an 831 word article, which is all Brady Averill is allowed to provide. But it's this kind of easy, cheap lunch the Star Tribune and Pioneer Press have served up for years. This town deserves better from its newspapers. Whether blogs can consistently provide a superior alternative is an open question. But their potential and increasingly frequent success in providing better analysis and writing and reporting and critical review (i.e., eating their lunch) is a fact.
More on this article from Mitch Berg.
UPDATE: Our time investment in getting interviewed wasn't completely in vain. We do get a capsule summary of the site. Bonus quote by me, on the gravitas of Fraters Libertas:
The blog has no specific focus. "I don't care if you're going to put your grocery list up, you're going to put something up," Ward said.
Yes, that'll drive the readers our way!
In my own defense, that answer was in regard to a question about our early days, and our concerns about finding something to write about every single day. Ah well, at least they spelled my name right.
No comments:
Post a Comment