Twice Bitten, Much Squealing

Get ready for the onslaught, new media. After the huge role that bloggers have played in both the Swift Vets story and the CBS/Rather document story, some members of traditional media are scared and they’re ready to strike back.

The current controversy over the validity of documents pushed in large part by bloggers and purporting to prove that President Bush received special treatment in the National Guard shows that partisan Internet pundits are having a growing impact on mainstream press, for better or worse, according to several newspaper editors.

Although editors from four major dailies contend that their product remains the most trusted source of news for most readers, they admit the blogging community is offering competition and provoking even more skepticism of the mainstream media than usual. But they are divided on whether or not this is a positive trend or not.

"It lends itself to a lot of manipulation," said James O'Shea, managing editor of the Chicago Tribune. "You can have information anarchy. You have to look at who these people are. We have to put some scrutiny on the bloggers."

That’s right. (sarcasm) The identity and leanings of the bloggers matter more to Mr. O’Shea than whether the truth of any situation is brought to light. Next he'll call for background investigations.

Some pundits, including columnists who write for newspapers, have claimed this week that the blog uprising over the CBS documents signals the end of "old media" dominance. But O'Shea believes "that's a lot of baloney. Wait until people start relying on THEIR information and getting burned."

Mr. O’Shea still doesn’t quite get it, why blogging is so popular. Bloggers (including this one) make mistakes all the time, but are instantly accountable for the information they put forward. Anyone can research, use and dispute and assertion put forth on a blog. And anyone who gets “burned” relying solely on information found on blogs isn’t doing enough of his/her own research. As we suspect, that’s what happened to CBS with its vetting of the “Bush” documents, totally without the assistance of bloggers.

"It is an increasing burden," said Dennis Ryerson, editor of The Indianapolis Star, who admits daily papers are feeling the impact of bloggers. "It hurts because now anyone can publish on the Web. You have people who are politically aligned raising questions about our standards, but there is no attention given to their standards."

Sure there is, Mr. Ryerson. If a blogger consistent puts out information found to be bogus, he/she loses readership and the word is out like lightening. By the way, this is the same reason that some traditional media outlets--like yours--have lost viewers and readership. Some things are universal. You've just chosen to ignore it until it jumped up and bit you.

"These are not disinterested observers," he [Ryerson] said of the bloggers. "I've long maintained that the Internet can be a great thing, but it is also a curse."

Of course bloggers aren’t disinterested observers! (duh!) Most of us put our biases right up front and center. Would that most traditional media did that. As for the curse thing, you’re correct there also: a curse for people like you.

There are two more newspaper editiors-- Doug Clifton of The Plain Dealer in Cleveland and Phil Bronstein of the San Francisco Chronicle--quoted in the article who have more positive, if guarded, things to say about blogging. But at the end, Ryerson squeals a little and fires a parting shot.

"I don't have a crystal ball," he said. "It is hurting and having an impact. They are now using us more as a punching bag."

Asked what he thought about criticism from the blogs that mainstream papers downplay certain stories, O'Shea said, "I write for our readers, not the bloggers."

Do you smell it? I do. It’s the smell of fear.

Comments

[StinKerr]

It seems to me that they have two choices:

1. They can deny, deny, deny until they go out of existence. The medium will then be reinvented in the image of bloggers.

2. They can reform/reinvent themselves, holding themselves to the higher standard of integrity they espouse.

[torchy]

Smells like.......victory

[MartiniPundit]

This sort of thing has been going on for years, but has been confined to academics, consultants, and think tanks. And no one paid attention because the truth was too difficult to find on a regular basis.

Now, due to the "curse" of the internet, the barriers of entry are basically the cost of an internet connection. The Mandarins of the Media may not like it, but there's nothing they can do about it. Let them do their background checks - by this time next year, everyone will assume the results were forged.

[Brad R. Torgersen]

I agree. Let the information barons of the MSM thumb their nose at the blogs and make subtle threats. The asteroid hit when the 90's internet boom swept through America, and now that the sky has darkened and the food is vanishing, the MSM dinosaurs have only to thrash about and roar their indignance before they ultimately succumb to the drastically altered climate. Meanwhile, those fleet-footed, warm-blooded, furry little blogs which have, thusfar, treaded the undergrowth of a MSM-dominated information age, will rise to claim their place as the new masters.

[ErikZ]

Oh for pete's sake. They're just going to have to change the way they do business. The media mongols that still see themselves as the gatekeepers will have to wake up. Go back to being a reporters, instead of trying to push agendas and most of this will blow over.

It will require the people in charge of those media organisations to stop using them as ways to force shape public opinion though.

[Kat-Missouri]

That last comment ..

"I write for our readers, not the bloggers"

Duh! We are your readers. That guy is a bozo. How did he think we found out what they wrote? Osmosis? Crystal balls?

That line should actually read, "open mouth, insert foot".

[baldilocks]

Kat: that cracked me up too. But, sometimes, I leave some things out and wait and see if some of the readers are paying attention.

[Ben]

Its called Bulverism, a word I had just learnt. It was coined by C.S.Lewis some years ago. (Hopefully, as he has been dead for quite some time now.) Its an argument tactic, where you attempt to distract the questioner, or dismiss a declarative statement by dismissing the messenger via the use of some non sequeter. (Assuming I got the definition right.)

"Well of course he says that. He's a Republican." The truth or falseness of the statement does not matter. Its all in who says what when.

I like how they say bloggers have no control mechanisms when it's the big media who's out of control. How many times have I read or heard something that made me sit and write a letter to the editor? Too many to count. How many times have I actually finished one? Very few (although Reggie Rivers got one).

Reason being, NO ONE is going to see that letter, probably not even the editor. Some flunkie parses them first, I'm sure.

Bloggers, however, don't have this luxury. Comments are out there for all to see, each one proving or disproving the post in question.

Big media would never allow "we the people" to do this, which is why they are falling by the wayside. Good riddance.

[Rustmeister]

Ok, lost the name somehow, but that one's mine.

[Phil Dillon]

Don't you just love our media! They're worried about information anarchy. Right! They're REALLY worried about losing control. Read Dick Viguerie's book "America's Right Turn" and you'll see what I mean.

There's a communications revolution going on and the media don't like it a bit. Bloggers are the "Digital Paul Reveres" who are calling them to account for the bias that they've masked as objectivity for years.

Well they can't do it with impunity any more. We're watching them!

[Carridine]

"From two ranks amongst mankind hath power been seized... kings and ecclesiastics."

"I have given POWER to the people."

The Lord of Hosts, circa 1870

We're just beginning to experience the far-reaching effects of His gift!

[Toren]

Mainstream media lit out for la-la land as soon as Woodward and Bernstein were deified for "bringing down a president." From that day forward every journalism student dreamed of his chance to change the world. Reporting the facts vanished from their toolbox.
It's taken a long time but the rot from that left turn has finally caused the whole house of cards to start collapsing.

[jj]

There are a lot more people than just the MSM who would like to muzzle the Internet. Remember that we are not invincible and keep your antennae up (or keep your helmet on Baldi). Once upon a time Napster was thought to be invincible. Now it's a memory.