Sewing circles, blogs and the high price of technology

First, let me say that blogs cannot be highlighted, passed from my hand to yours, and stacked in my room for my cat to play with. Oh how i love paper, and the ease of type in print compared to type on screen. And I also find it hillarious that the blogger.com spellchecker found "blog" and "blogger" to be spelled wrong.

Is blogging news worthy?
My problem with blogging and this new world order in media is this: credibility! I know I'm not always credible, and that means the same for everyone blogging. What are the laws of liability on the internet? Are ther any? Do blogs have to, want to, need to run corrections?
I don't think so.
To me a blog cannot be used as a credible news source. Blogs seem to be more like big sewing circle webs, that only help create something out of nothing a mojority of the time.

So, trying to be responsible in this reporting or my opinion, here is a credible person backing up my idea. First with source info: I found this at the Columbia Journalism Review website. http://www.cjrdaily.org/archives/001851.asp

Michael Bürgi has been the editor of MediaWeek, the business trade publication, since 2004. He joined the magazine in 1993 to report on the cable industry and later became news editor, managing editor and then executive editor. He has overseen all day-to-day editorial operations since 2003. Prior to Mediaweek, Bürgi reported for Multichannel News and Inside Media.

Liz Cox Barrett: I'm curious to hear what the editor of a media trade publication thinks about blogs, how they've influenced the media business (or not) and their potential to make money (or not). Do you read any blogs? Are there any that you'd point to as particularly influential and/or likely to turn a profit?

Michael Bürgi: I'm going to start off sounding like a complete curmudgeon. First, let me say I'm a Luddite, I'm not a tremendous user of the Web for enjoyment or for recreational purposes. I use the Web for information and, really, for my job. So I'm not a tremendous fan of blogs, I've got to be honest.

What I'd say blogs really are -- if it's not a completely inappropriate comment -- a kind of a circle jerk for the world of journalists. ... We're all writing for each other. As a result I've never enjoyed that or had fun participating in that kind of milieu. I'm not a big fan of blogs but I also don't know that blogs have a big business future. They'll be around, they'll be part of the wonderful world of the Internet for decades until the next cool way of sharing information comes around, but I don't think there is much of a business there because I'm not sure how many advertisers feel the need to reach journalists (we're only one step above lawyers and used car salesmen). I'm not sure advertisers are clamoring to get their ads in front of us.

I've got to be honest, I don't read blogs. I do notice Gawker sometimes but I've got to admit I'm mainly looking just to see if they've picked up any of my stories. It's a little bit of a vanity contest, whether or not Gawker or Romenesko or MediaBistro picked up one of our stories. I don't tend to go to blogs to find stuff out or get a kick out of seeing what's out there. I read newspapers and newsweeklies and watch TV news for most of my information.

I do find fascinating this new subculture of, I guess it's being called "citizen journalism," which is really taking root and blogs are an early extension of that. It fascinates me to think how this will ever turn into a business or will it ever need to become a business. ... I'm not a big participant but I'm definitely an interested observer ...

A question for the media "all-knowings"

What would the best avenue to systemically change news coverage of minorities?
Agreeing with the article we just read in class, how could the environment of the newsroom change in order to represent the surrounding news. Like most editors I keep a very watchful eye on what is and is not news. More than not, my personal lenses are race and gender blind, but I still feel them inaccurate.
How can this be avoided?
First, the cultural spectrum in the newsroom most be of a broad nature: men and women from divergent and expansive backgrounds. Second, I believe a "beat" that specifies woman and minorities would also be beneficial. Third, a pristinely clear understanding of the audience of the paper.

Experimental ideas
An opinion of mine is that mass-media, on all levels is slowly stepping backwards. The national papers will slowly lose traction to the local, or market specific ones. This, hopefully, will again ignite excitement into informational products, be it paper or screen based. The audiences seem to hunger for what is close to their small world. 24 hour cable cannot compete with that kin of logistic.

The language we in the media never use

My rant on Katrina coverage, partically in newsprint

The debate that is unraveling across monitors, pages and television screens around America has been a long time coming. So rarely do we in print like to push these issues to the front, if it is given space at all. Why, because a fire storm almost always ensues.
The media, all outlets, tend to put blinders on and worry about the now. The big story today, the feature next week, the audience we seem to be growing further and further apart from.
I hope it is not a newsroom cultural item.
I find that environment most intoxicating with knowledge, discourse and deviating opinions. Sure people's opinions clash, but that is the point. In that environment one cannot shy away from some hard truths.
But how do report racism that doesn't involve hate as much as fear? Or poverty that is so ingrained into society that money is no answer?
Hard questions that not only involve hugely difficult solutions that will take hours, or books to explain, but involves multiple deeply difficult questions first.
I have no answers, and I would hope no 50 people would.
That is why the newsromm just keeps on keeping on. Blinders intact, it deals with class and race in manageable chunks that can be attributed to facts, not ideals. Maybe my generation will be able keep a head up for these slow growing stories that are always below the surface. And align that photographs and copy.
A panhandler asks for cash, but does anybody truly understand the way that person lives. Maybe a life such as that can only be experienced, not looked upon with empathy.
It is horrid that the situation has raised the eyebrows of editors and readers. Race and class have not had headline space like this in my time. But as we speak the events are being pigeon-holed: race or class? Black or white? Have or have not?
Just like politics: the more complex the issue, the more the message gets muddled. Maybe its a bit of every single issue rolled into to one. There is no peace in that answer though, and that is tough question for a civil society to ask itself. And you know what? That is damn hard to put into a "lead" and a "nut-graph", find sources that will talk on record and call a photo for.
Still, it needs to be asked. I just hope the media doesn't answer it for me, it's not there job..

ZA