Posted on 12/22/2006 1:11:26 PM PST by shrinkermd
Blogs are very important these days. Even Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has one. The invention of the Web log, we are told, is as transformative as Gutenberg's press, and has shoved journalism into a reformation, perhaps a revolution.
The ascendancy of Internet technology did bring with it innovations. Information is more conveniently disseminated, and there's more of it, because anybody can chip in. There's more "choice"--and in a sense, more democracy. Folks on the WWW, conservatives especially, boast about how the alternative media corrodes the "MSM," for mainstream media, a term redolent with unfairness and elitism.
The blogs are not as significant as their self-endeared curators would like to think. Journalism requires journalists, who are at least fitfully confronting the digital age. The bloggers, for their part, produce minimal reportage. Instead, they ride along with the MSM like remora fish on the bellies of sharks, picking at the scraps.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
...Certainly the MSM, such as it is, collapsed itself. It was once utterly dominant yet made itself vulnerable by playing on its reputed accuracy and disinterest to pursue adversarial agendas. Still, as far from perfect as that system was, it was and is not wholly imperfect. The technology of ink on paper is highly advanced, and has over centuries accumulated a major institutional culture that screens editorially for originality, expertise and seriousness.
Of course, once a technosocial force like the blog is loosed on the world, it does not go away because some find it undesirable. So grieving over the lost establishment is pointless, and kind of sad. But democracy does not work well, so to speak, without checks and balances. And in acceding so easily to the imperatives of the Internet, we've allowed decay to pass for progress.
My conclusion is they hate losing money. In the meantime I did sort on the title so if this is a repeat post I don't need a mea culpa.
You are right! I still can't find this on my "search" function. Oh well, the moderator can take it off. In the meantime, I might be forgetful but I am consistent in what I believe.
Iowahawk has been first-draft dumpster-diving again; this time he’s surfaced with an early version of Wall Street Journal columnist Joseph Rago’s attack on the blogosphere.
The blogs are not as significant as their self-endeared, preening, narcissist curators would like to think. Real journalism requires journalists, who are at least fitfully confronting the digital age — it takes hardbitten, cynical J-school trained newshounds in fedoras and trench coats, willing to dig and probe and expense whatever it takes to break the big story, getting their facts straight the first time, and making sure they’ve saved all the relevant fact-gathering receipts. The bloggers, for their part, produce minimal reportage. Instead, these filthy, bottom-feeding parasites are like aquatic lice, clinging to the underside of leeches who suck blood from the remora fish who cowardly ride along the belly of this proud, aging shark I call “professional journalism.”
More success is met in purveying opinion and comment. Some thoughtful critics note that blogs tend to disinhibit, and are responsible the coarsening and increasing volatility of political life; and, for that reason alone, these critics note that blogs should just go screw themselves. Maybe so. But politics weren’t much rarefied when proto-blogger John Wilkes Booth was venting his opinion at FordTheater.com back in ‘65. The larger problem with blogs, it seems to me, is quality. Most of them are pretty awful. Many, even some with large followings, are downright appalling. Seriously bad, to the point of physical, gastrointestinal revulsion. Full-on, projectile vomit stuff.
Don’t believe me? Go read some blogs. Go ahead, I’ll wait.
Read the whole thing. As a member of the keening blog rabble, it is your duty. "I'd much rather be called a "bottom feeding parasite", than to be a confirmed lying @$$hole, which 95% of ALL journalists are."
Spook86 writes a spot on slap down to Rago's piece. "Journalism requires Journalists".
often with eye-catching dancing hamsters,
09:03 AM PST | link: 179 comments
Yes, quite good and a good post. My problem with blogs is there are so many that have something to say I lack the time to review all.
The guy sounds like he is trying to sell a porn film about himself.
Apparently, Joseph Rago has also written an article for the WSJ claiming that Muslims are "model citizens."
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/007990.php
I never heard of this jerk, but he seems to be a typical news writer for the WSJ.
There is certainly an Information Overload problem associated with blogs, particularly those with comments enabled.
If moderated with an even hand, you get fact-checking, relevant links, and even banter that helps get to the root of the subject- but it can take forever to wade through all that stuff.
And there is, sometimes, a "chase your tail" aura about the blogs that just link back and forth to each other- but even so, I rate "more information" as generally better.
I still get the feeling this Rago character doesn't free commentary or criticism very much, and that's his main beef with the blogosphere. There certainly are some awful ones out there, but it's kind of like DU or the Canadian Rabble- you learn not to go there.
If that's the case, then why did Rago write this?
In terms of being an imbecile, this editorial is a real Blow for Freedom for the man.
There is nothing sadder than picking up a copy of the WSJ today.I remember reading it as a teenager and being so impressed with its quality and its disdain for crass, timely, postmodern garbage. It was a newspaper men read.
Now, crass postmodern Jerry Springer stuff and effeminate feature articles... that's their raison d'etre.
Rago: Guess what, journalism major. You don't know $h!t compared to some of the bloggers I read, including many posters here on FR.
The difference is this: The bloggers are, in strong and weak attempts, trying to find the truth, IMHO, at least. The press, well, they are in the pocket of some liberal entity, probably the Rats, at least they are most conforming with the Rat world view. Journalists, for the most part, are filthy, lying, America-hating, seditious provocateur bastards.
So jam it Rago, you only got one thing right in your opinion piece:
"Certainly the MSM, such as it is, collapsed itself."
Now go get a real job.
As in, he himself shouldn't be here at Fr!!!!
Rago: Guess what, journalism major. You don't know $h!t compared to some of the bloggers I read, including many posters here on FR.
Mr. Rago joined the Journal in 2005. He is a graduate of Dartmouth College, where he took a degree in American history and was editor in chief of the Dartmouth Review.
That's all that needs to be said to denigrate this silver spooned, pimple-faced, pompous twit.
They assume they are leaders and individualists but they plan to lead a collectivist society according to their image. The reason they are so easily upended by, say, bloggers is they really aren't that individualistic or creative in their thinking. They simply are bright people who are conforming to a ruthless sameness characteristic of Ivy league and other prestigious institutions.
Bloggers are big dummys, and besides, they're going to ruin the good we've got going.
Illegal immigrants are to working Americans as Bloogers are to elite bozoes like Rago.
Great answer!!!! Bloggers are doing the work effete, elite agenda-driven "journalists" won't do. Excellent!
Mumsy and Dadsy got him his job. That's how we get most of our pundits (yeah, and most of our con pundits, too), family and social connections.
Sad part is, he's probably proud of this editorial.
Bloggers are actually correspondents. In the tradition of correspondents writing letters back home to editors of newspapers. The only difference is, the Internet provides such wide-open bandwidth that the modern equivalent of the correspondent gets "published" with no quality control at all. Meaning that, depending on the blog or forum, the quality can range all the way down to that of scrawlings on the wall of a boy's locker room toilet stall.They assume they are leaders and individualists but they plan to lead a collectivist society according to their image. The reason they are so easily upended by, say, bloggers is they really aren't that individualistic or creative in their thinking. They simply are bright people who are conforming to a ruthless sameness characteristic of Ivy league and other prestigious institutions.It would be intolerable to have to read all of it - but that's OK, no one has to read any of it if they don't wanna. But if much of it is unreadable, that is no guarantee that no excellence is to be found there. And it certainly is no guarantee that the quality of Big Journalism is acceptable. Dan Rather was perhaps the most famous journalist in America two years ago, and he trotted out some crude forgeries and assayed to swing a presidential election with them. There may well have been some erroneous reporting on the web about those "TANG Memos" - but the bottom line is that CBS and Dan Rather were caught being political and calling it "objectivity."
Our "learned" friend heaps contempt on bloggers, and expects us to assume that "real journalists" are objective. But Adam Smith has somewhat to say relevant to that:
The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing . . . It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity, and they very seldom teach it enough. - Adam SmithIf you expect me to trust you, you must respect me. And that is what is signally missing from Big Journalism.
13 posted by shrinkermd
It all reduces down to the second guessing of people who deal with reality by people who are free of any bottom line discipline. Which is nothing but cheap talk.
Aw, come on! Rago put in his time, got his little degree and now he DEMANDS our respect. I'm sure given enough blogger provocation (by hatefully exposing facts Libs would rather remain safely ignored) congress will enact some type of journalism full-employment act that will make it illegal for anyone to get their news from any source other than an official "MSM" source.
You will respect his authori-tah!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.