This weekend I made myself look foolish by posting a comment on another blog, failed to make sure it was coherent, and was subsequently slammed by another reader. Luckily I don't know anyone involved so I'll retain my dignity amongst my friends and acquaintances but the experience made me think about a debate that has been going on since the "Blogoshpere" emerged:
Where do bloggers rank in the literary caste system?
Are we journalists with an obligation to check facts, edit our work, and disclose conflicts of interest? Or are we simply opinion-slingers, something akin to a bartender or the town gossip, with no special responsibilities or need for veracity. Should readers seriously consider what we write here, or are we just the big-mouthed cranks of cyberspace?
Naturally, some blogs are better than others. Some bloggers consistently post top-notch articles, up to the minute news, and even have sponsors. Others are just one guy's random rants, devoid of thoughts and puntuation. But can we really separate the good from the bad, or is every blogger a reject from the legitimate world of print? Maybe there are already blog rankings or ways to get your blog certified so that you are considered better than the rest. However, it seems to me that some very popular blogs can be somewhat crass and sophomoric . . . not exactly up to civilized standards.
I also don't know how one defines journalism in a day and age defined by the internet. I read time and again that writers on the staffs of some big time print newspapers constantly check the Drudge Report and some major blogs for up-to-the-second news. So, have they lifted internet dwellers into a new sphere? Or should we all come to grips with our second class citizenship?
There is a classified blog, i.e. one that requires a security clearance to access. Evidently, someone thinks it's important enough to appropriate public expenditures for it.
ReplyDeleteI have to confess that there's a part of me that is firmly convinced that most blogs are merely superfluous extensions of the person's ego. Avoiding this was paramount when I started this blog. That's why I've always encouraged others to post. I emphatically did not want this blog to become a boring repository for my thoughts on everything. People have better things to do than read my opinions.
ReplyDeleteI do think however that most blogs are sad manifestations of how far standards have fallen in America, in terms of syntax, grammar, etc. I would be cautious to label bloggers as journalists. I think most bloggers are just too "raw" to be accredited with the title of journalist. Of course, this is a very interesting question that merits more thought. The problem as I see it, is that bloggers can post whatever they want, literally. There's little to no accountability. I would have to judge a blog on a case by case basis. Certainly, there are many blogs that are excellent sources for news and commentary. But many are nothing but meeting points for disgruntled spirits who hurl poisonous invective at their opponents, with a dose of poor grammar for good measure.
Wow. A classified blog. I'm glad my taxes are paying for such useful ventures . . . although I do wonder what they're talking about.
ReplyDeleteAnd James, at least now we have 2 cranks posting their opinions for the world to read (or ignore)!
I think on the totum pole of journalism, blogs are very, very, veryveryvery loooooooowwww.
ReplyDeleteIf it makes you feel any better Jason, your comment reminded me of my rashness in the way I was approaching the situation, something that I theoretically try to avoid. Ergo, this article is very relevent.
One of the problems of the blogesphere is anonymity; us ladies have to be anonymous for safety reasons, but this opens up the problem that modern technology has put people into (for the record, I'm not against modern technology). When we are dealing with people face to face, we know to exercise discretion to avoid appearing insensitive or foolish. In the blog world, we're not looking in the face the people who we're potentially offending, and as a result we openly demonstrate how bitingly egocentric we really are; there can be the tendency to sacrifice charity for wit and sarcasm (something I've definitely fallen into . . .).
The only real benefit a blog is to the writing itself is if you have intelligent, critical people reading your blog, it does help to improve one's overall argument-making abilities -- especially when someone points out a crucial flaw in your argument.
GreenGirl is right when she points out the benefits of blogs:
ReplyDelete"The only real benefit a blog is to the writing itself is if you have intelligent, critical people reading your blog, it does help to improve one's overall argument-making abilities -- especially when someone points out a crucial flaw in your argument."
I would add that blogs, so long as they are seriously interested in news and relevant insights, (i.e. not just forums for sentimental whining and name-calling, etc.), can also serve as useful tools for polishing one's abilities as a writer.
The BBC just put this article up discussing a code of conduct for bloggers.
ReplyDeleteCheck it outHere.