Interesting take

[unusualmusic_lj_archive]

Listening Post - Citizen journalism - 01 August 08 Part 1

This week, we have put together a special broadcast focusing on what's possibly one of the most debated news trends and one of the most well-known, citizen journalism. Critics call it journalism on the cheap, unskilled hacks putting out stories that are heavy on opinion and light on fact. According to those championing amateur reporters, it is a way to keep mainstream media honest and in some cases, it's just about the only way to get a story out.


Listening Post- Military and media special-10 Aug 08 -Part 2

I believe that the programme has missed a key part of citizen journalism, the fact that they provide analysis of media stories, and tease out the bias that mainstream media in the USA for instance, have shown. The traditional media in the USA, I find, often distorts events rather widely and tries very hard to fit events into a narrative. Check for instance the Hillary Clinton video, which was distorted in order to make her sound as if she was hell-bent on disrupting the convention, when she...wasn't. I also find that there are certain news stories that I know about sometimes two days before they hit national television. That Hillary Clinton and Bosnia thing? I knew about it in the morning. Hell I helped spread the word on the youtube that was assembled drawing attention to the gaffe. Even though traditional media footage was where the info was from, the news media picked up the story in the afternoon. Via concerted DIGGing. The US Attorney Scandals BROKE on www.TalkingPointsMemo.com . After it was amplified by the Netroots? THAT was when the mainstream media deigned to pay attention. Also, well-done blogs can flash out a story more by providing many links to amplify the knowledge that they are imparting. And I can get way better analysis from my fave bloggers than is available on 98% of US news talkshows. Hell, the fact that we actually have to have Media Matters which basically exist to correct misinfo in the media, is proof that traditional journalism has got issues. Otherwise, this si a pretty cool documentary.

Comments

[unusualmusic.livejournal.com]

So then what SHOULD be said that it is not being covered as it should be then. And what the blogs are doing is amplifying what would otherwise be ignored, (that is, not yakked about incessantly on the news shows and having several articles wriitten about them) yes?

You make a valid pont

[fengi.livejournal.com]

Yes and I'll agree there needs to be a way to incorporate what blogs to well into the the traditiona media.

Journalists who understand blogging dynamics end up doing a better job.

Media outlets who view blogs as an unavoidable evil seem to end up less responsive and respectful of readers than in the pre-internet age.

Perhaps the problem is the current version of capitalism has made it an either/or situation - because the electronic era seems to function as a handy excuse to pay everyone as little as possible. That money is going somewhere...

[zarq.livejournal.com]

And what the blogs are doing is amplifying what would otherwise be ignored, (that is, not yakked about incessantly on the news shows and having several articles wriitten about them) yes?

Unfortunately, the flip side of this is often a story publicized to the stars which would never have been released as fact if it hadn't been seized upon by someone with alterior motives. Do we ever see Michele Malkin apologize when she screws up? Atrios? Drudge? Little Green Footballs? The DailyKos contingent? No. Because that would make their readers question their credibility.

The blogosphere posts unconfirmed stories as if they were absolute fact. They routinely assert half truths or potential truths as gospel. They're wrong often enough that anyone with half a brain in their heads would begin to question their accuracy. Instead, they get away with it, because they are each preaching to their particular choirs.

The blogger mob mentality serves an important purpose, to be sure. But we shouldn't ignore or dismiss their pitfalls and weaknesses.

[(Anonymous)]

They're wrong often enough that anyone with half a brain in their heads would begin to question their accuracy.

When I consider the various distortions on the subject of race and minority issues, The Iraq War (hell anything to do with the Bush Administration),a good lot of reporting on immigration, to say nothing of issues related to women? To say nothing of politics eg. Barack Obama =far left (I wish!) scary black dude, John McCain is GREAT with foreign policy nevermind that can't tell the diff. between Shia and Sunni? I sort of start thinking the same about trad. media too. Obviously, one has to pick and choose between which blogs make sense and which don't. Daily Kos is a group blog. Therefore, one needs to read with a discerning eye to pick out the posters that make sense (hint: make sure they have links that back up their assertions) The Drudge Report is rather crass and definitely not what I would consider news-worthy , but funnily enough, mainstream media personalities have admitted that "[it] rules their world". Which really doesn't say a lot about their judgement, does it? Michelle Malkin is an idiot. Basically, just like how you have to pick and choose which trad. media instrument is better than the rest, one has to choose which non-trad. media makes the best calls. The point is that one of teh big drivers behind the netroots was the trad. media was getting it wrong, a lot of the times, and we weren't getting a whole lot of apologies about that either. So blogging has got issues. But quite frankly, if I really have to sit down and listen to some dumb-ass pundit declaim that Obama shouldn't go to Hawaii cause its too exotic for real Americans? (Nevermind that its a State, that he was born there and that he was visiting family there?)Excuse me while I head for more sensible pastures.

[unusualmusic.livejournal.com]

That anon comment was me, sorry.