Cokie Roberts: The dark side of media democratization [Free Republic dissed]

metrowestdailynews ^ | Oct 19, 2008 | By Cokie Roberts and Steven V. Roberts

[Jim Robinson]

Yada, yada, yada.

~~snip~~

The growing power of rumor is part of a much larger transformation in the way that voters receive information about politics. The old model was a vertical one, where professional journalists delivered their reports to a largely passive audience through television or newspapers. The new model is horizontal, where folks get information from each other and actively pass it on, through e-mail, text messages and viral videos. Everyone is a potential broadcaster.

This "democratization of information" has many benefits - more sources, more perspectives, more choices. In a forum Steve moderated for The International Journal of Press/Politics, Mark Jurkowitz, associate director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, offered two examples: the incendiary sermons of Obama's pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and Obama's speech on race and religion.

"Millions more people will see and observe and analyze those incidents online than would ever tune into a newscast showing the clips," Jurkowitz said. "So you are dramatically expanding the universe. (And) people can make up their own minds without any kind of media mediation whatsoever."

But there's also a dark side to this horizontal system. Without "media mediation," without the persistent truth-telling, fact-checking efforts of well-trained professionals, falsehoods can flourish.

The "he's an Arab" smear reached so widely that the New York Times devoted a front-page story to its origins. Its conclusion: After the allegations first appeared in 2004, they were picked up by the conservative Web site FreeRepublic.com "and spread steadily as others elaborated on its claims over the years in e-mail messages, Web sites, and books."

Said Danielle Allen, a Princeton professor who has studied the episode: "It's an example of how the Internet has given power to sources we would have never taken seriously at another point in time."

[longtermmemmory]

I do not see cokie robers screaming for licensing of journalists to cover the journalistic malpractice over the last year.

The MSM is upset FR is a successful blockade runner.

[exhaustedmomma]

I notice there is a comment section on the link website, following the article. Guess the "pro's" are "catching onto" the democratization process of information. (Aristotle defined this democratic ideal as rule by the people. He didn't mention anything about gate keepers. (Per Cokie: "...journalists who can sort through those voices and help voters decide who can be trusted, and who cannot."))

In the Age of the Internet, "steering out the truth" is still an essential part of democracy.
Which is why Free Republic and such outlets are "wildly" popular. MSM is, for the most part, no more than a biased mouthpiece for a select agenda. Places like FR are a "niche" where true democratization is allowed to process in the hands of the people... for the people... and by the people. Without the fettering of yellow journalism. Ummm, Cokie, those journalist back then fought the "truth", just like you professional modern day journalist of the MSM. They didn't win then, and you won't win now.

Pssst... Cokie: How in the name of Sam Hill did those pilgrim's and pioneers of this great country manage without "media mediation", without you professionals filtering the information for them?

Your candidate, Cokie, doesn't have the experience to lead. Print the proof in that.