One of the websites I help feed and care for won a nice award back in June. On Monday, Clyde and Stan were kind enough to go to NY and pick it up. Many of the Big Names in journalism were there: Brokow, Jennings, Rather… and our own Bob Priddy who –as RTNDA chairman– MC’d the event.
There was an interesting email exchange between between a couple of our reporters this week. David Brazeal’s comments seemed…sponge-worthy.
I think more likely we’re seeing is a gradual destruction of the great farce of 20th Century elite journalism–that we can do our jobs objectively. Dan Rather thinks he’s objective and Fox News is not. Fox News thinks it’s objective, and Dan Rather is not. The fact is, neither of them is objective. We might very well try to be objective, but it’s impossible for anyone with an opinion.
The problem for big-time journalism outlets is that people have figured this out. Most people don’t fault Dan Rather for being a liberal; they fault him for acting like he’s not. And the more these big institutions cling to this faade of true objectivity, the more obvious it will become to more people. As consumers get more sophisticated, they’re going to demand more source material, more first-person accounts, more access to opposing viewpoints. And they’re going to want it without the filter we’re used to providing. The question is whether we figure out a way to give it to them, or we go down with the ship.
I’m a couple of hundred pages into to Dan Gillmor’s We the Media: Grassroots Journalism by the People, for the People. Gillmor is technology columnist for the San Jose Mercury News, and his column runs in many other U.S. newspapers. He has been consistently listed by industry publications as among the most influential journalists in his field.
Our company owns and operates several state and regional radio news networks and I thought they might find the book interesting so I forwarded the Amazon review, which made reference to blogging. One of our news directors quickly responded:
“I don’t quite buy the idea that bloggers are journalists. They might be journal-writers or journal-keepers, but a blogger is a talk show host who usually thinks somebody should be interested in what he or she has to say, whether it’s correct, accurate, based on facts… or not. Blogging has some major integrity issues that make it more entertainment than trustworthy information. I still need sources I can trust, and blogs don’t reach that level yet.”
First of all, nobody has suggested –certainly not Dan Gillmor– that all bloggers are journalists. As it happens, Mr. Gillmor writes a blog and is a highly respected journalist. Does he have “integrity issues?” Speaking of which…
A few year back we had a reporter working in one of our newsrooms that was doing a lot of anti-gun stories. When I asked him about it, he said he felt he had to do these to “balance out” the (paid) NRA ads that were currently airing on our network. Then there was the report (same newsroom) that left us become the PR flack for the state Republican party. In his first public statement he said he could no long remain silent in the face of the threat posed by the liberal Democrats in our state. Talk about integrity issues.
My colleague’s reaction reminds me of the Pharisees’ outrage that this Jesus guy would muscle in on their turf (I’m not a religious guy but I saw Jesus Christ Superstar a couple of times). I should probably disclose that I am not a journalist. At least I don’t think I am. I didn’t go to J-School (I smoked some J’s while in school but…) but I did work at a small town radio station covered the news. I went to city council meetings and hospital board meetings and wrote stories and cut up some tape and did my best to tell people what happened. If we had had the Internet and blogs back then, I might have used that tool as well.
This whole blogger vs. journalist thing has been going on for a while and smarter folks than I have written about it. I have to say the Real Journalists come across a little shrill on the subject. There are thousands (millions?) of blogs out there and very few rise to the level of anything that might be called “journalism.” But the same might be said about what passes for news on a lot of radio stations. So let’s not be too quick to slam the temple doors. We might miss something good.
David Weinberger sums it up nicely: “The Convention folks think their job is to script an event for the news media, and the news media don’t want to cover an event that’s been scripted.”
Three of our reporters are heading for Boston to cover the Democratic Convention. As reporters for state news networks, they focus on the state delegations and do a lot of their work at the hotel where the delegates are staying. Along with our “regular” news coverage, each of the reporters will take a stab at blogging the four-day event as well. Radio Iowa’s O. Kay Henderson posted some wonderful reports (via email) from the 2000 convention, but we just didn’t have tools (or the word “blog”). The other two guys are experienced reporters but are new to this kind of writing (as far as I know). Should be interesting.