Bloggers may never be considered worthy of the term "real" journalists. But they probably don`t mind. They have the power anyway.
For one thing, they`re not bound by the dictates of behaviour and publishing precepts of any employer. Their professional existence isn`t based on a business model. They can say what they like.
Against this offshoot branch of journalism, contrast the traditional face of the trade. I don`t have the benefit of decades in the job, but the classic complaint of those who do is that much of what passes for reporting today is a disappointment. Advertisements are the reason newspapers exist. My father in-law, strictly old-school in his take on these matters, is an exponent of this school of thought.
He maintains that editors today are more concerned with being profitable or at least financially viable, than with publishing the truth for the public good. They merely fill the spaces between the (important) ads with unimportant and sub-standard drivel that, by virtue of association with a once proud tradition, lends an echo of credence to what is basically a vicarious marketing machine.
Maybe journalism is indeed due for a shake-up (the readers are certainly ready), and we should welcome blogs with open arms.
Carel Alberts, Special editions editor, ITWeb Brainstorm
As you can see, he`s kind of fun - in a challenging way - to talk to. Of course, journalists are a bit like that. They`ve probably been bitching about slipping standards since about five minutes after journalists first took to taking out their frustrations in the public domain.
His view is finding general resonance among many people. Little wonder that against that background, bloggers have emerged as takers-of-the-truth-into-their-own-hands. Bloggers are people who have had enough. They`ve lost their belief in newspapers and the goodness and altruism of governments, employers, commerce, parents and even God. Paradoxically, they still want the nice warm feeling of believing in something, and so they`ve taken it upon themselves to produce and stand custodian to the truth.
They publish as if there`s no tomorrow. They do so without regard for the need for their truth to be heard, or its effects on people`s lives, emotional well-being or corporate fortunes (don`t be fooled - these are good journalistic attributes). And they often operate free of the limitations of learning, professional ethics or the restraint of sophistication. And they use a medium that doesn`t censor even the vilest subject matter.
The upshot
In the process, the door for exploitation of this noble ideal, to discover and publish the truth, has been opened wide. Bloggers have in effect taken a disappointing legacy and compounded the rottenness and the risk of it 10 times over. Ordinary folk can broadcast whatever they get their hands on or are able to manufacture with PhotoShop. And we lap it up. If it`s grotesque and sensational, and may or may not be true, but is certainly entertaining, we want it.
The Onion, not a blog but a celebration of the utter and ironic devaluation of information in what is supposed to be the information age, is one such-like manifestation of the fact that nobody honestly cares about veracity anymore, not unless it`s a passing remembrance of more innocent times. It is, moreover, a creepy, vaguely official moneymaking outfit in a murky industry of faddish make-believe. What chance does journalism stand?
Sure, one can say only stupid people fall for the Onion`s admittedly funny, but ultimately pointless parodies. My feeling is that the same joke formula is funny only once, except to groupies. And of course, a lot of people can think they`re funny, with unconsidered consequences.
Too many times have we been genuinely, irresolvably uncertain about the authenticity of some piece of Internet hysteria, such as the videos of beheadings presided over by faceless executioners. It may or may not have been fake. It`s certainly disgusting and it added to tensions, but it stirred something deep within enough of us to guarantee a market.
Not all like that
I had all these thoughts before I even read the story doing the rounds on the Net about a pending court decision over the journalistic status of bloggers. The story illustrates my point perfectly.
My point is that information doesn`t really matter much, not in blogs, nor, sadly, in much of journalism proper, nor anywhere else.
The story doesn`t discuss the propensity of bloggers to publish untested 'truth` or bald exaggeration or lies. It is actually about three comparatively sane-minded, though irresponsible bloggers who saw fit to publish trade secrets about Apple`s product development. Which leads me to believe blogs target all of us, even me. I`m just the sort of reader modern newspapers and irresponsible bloggers are looking for, the kind who is ready to assume the worst and read their stuff.
Secondly, the story is guilty of the same trick many bloggers are guilty of - exaggeration. Many newspapers do that. Their headlines promise far more than the story actually delivers. In this case, I don`t think it`s totally amiss to assume on reading the headline (Net buzzing on bloggers` status) that it is a story about the kind of tricks bloggers get up to.
Which makes me think that maybe journalism is indeed due for a shake-up (the readers are certainly ready), and we should welcome blogs with open arms. It makes life a hell of a lot more interesting. If you`re going to second-guess everything you read, you might as well expose yourself to everything out there.
* Editor`s note: Having considered both the pros and the cons of blogging, ITWeb is about to launch a blogging service - BlogIT.
Share