Answering Back to the News Media, Using the Internet
"In this new world, the audience and sources are publishers," Mr. Rosen said. "They are now saying to journalists, 'We are producers, too. So the interview lies midpoint between us. You produce things from it, and we do, too.' From now on, in a potentially hostile interview situation, this will be the norm."
All these developments have forced journalists to respond in a variety of ways, including becoming more open about their methods and techniques and perhaps more conscious of how they filter information.
"To the extent that you know there's someone monitoring every word, it probably compels you to be even more careful, which is a good thing," said Chris Bury, the "Nightline" correspondent whose interview was published by the Discovery Institute. "But readers and viewers need to realize that one interview is only one part of the story, that there are other interviews and other research and that this is just a sliver of what goes into a complete report."
__________________________________
You know what's going to happen when the NY TIMES has a say on blogging, and that's what all this folderol is about. Defending the mainstream media against the internet newsmongers by whinging to the high heavens about how much "fact-checking" goes into each and every story, as if it were all a bother to begin with but hey, we do it and you guys can't.
Bullshit. Sure we don't have the logistics to put boots in the field but fact checking is what brought down Dan Rather and his compatriots when they tried to pull a fast one and rig the last election. The truth about fact checking is that the media sucks at it; always has, always will. Have some asshole of a Mayor let thousands of his people get caught in a raging flood and every word out of the mans mouth was considered pure gold by the jerkwads who call themselves reporters, so we were all preparing for many, many deaths just because these same reporters weren't doing their job of telling us whats in the news. That's because the real job of the modern day newspaper person has NOTHING to do with facts and EVERYTHING to do with titilation, exaggeration, and misdirection. Modern news is just another arm of the entertainment division but blogging isn't. Not yet. And you can't use PJ Media as an example because that isn't an example of real blogging.
What the muckety mucks are TRYING to say is that we're all just a gaggle of unprofessional wannabes who couldn't find their ass with two hands and a GPS system, but all their whinging protestation proves is that they simply don't get it. We want the REAL deal, not some politicized agenda. We want the news, not the newscover. Now maybe Chris Bury feels that Baba Wawa doing a special on heaven is news, but I sure don't. Maybe Chris thinks that Rather got the short end of the stick, too, in fact he must feel this way or why make such a ridiculous comment about the networks being fact checkers par exellance.
They do the demographics and decide how to tailor a piece to fit the largest audience, case closed. And the facts be damned.
And the NY TIMES, the downhill NY TIMES, the soon to be a fading memory NY TIMES, is in the mess they're in because they exert the effort to defend their positions and not a scintilla of it to understand why their readership is deserting in droves. They really don't know that half a story won't cut it any more, or are SO intent on presenting the liberal viewpoint of everything that they'll go down rather than change.
Blogs will never put the mainstream media out of business. But blogs WILL put most of the newspaper media out of big business, and force television into more and more fluff pieces because who wants to REALLY get the facts straight.
Or as Ms Walters would put it, "If you were a twee, what kind of twee would you be..."
No comments:
Post a Comment