http://www.newsome.org/2006/10/blogs-papers-and-irony/ Kent Newsome on technology, music and life Sun, 05 Feb 2012 23:43:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://www.newsome.org/2006/10/blogs-papers-and-irony/comment-page-1/#comment-4201 mark Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:30:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/newsome/?p=3256#comment-4201 as a former journalist (as of last week), most people are missing the point about bloggers vs. journalists. for the most part, bloggers opine on the news or trends, while journlist cover the news. take a look at how often blogs cite the new york times. bloggers will not replace journalist but journalists will have to act more like bloggers by writing on the fly and engage in a two-way dialogue. a more accurate scenario is the two worlds will co-exist, although i suspect journalists will have to change a lot more than bloggers. as a former journalist (as of last week), most people are missing the point about bloggers vs. journalists. for the most part, bloggers opine on the news or trends, while journlist cover the news. take a look at how often blogs cite the new york times. bloggers will not replace journalist but journalists will have to act more like bloggers by writing on the fly and engage in a two-way dialogue. a more accurate scenario is the two worlds will co-exist, although i suspect journalists will have to change a lot more than bloggers.

]]> http://www.newsome.org/2006/10/blogs-papers-and-irony/comment-page-1/#comment-4202 mark Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:30:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/newsome/?p=3256#comment-4202 as a former journalist (as of last week), most people are missing the point about bloggers vs. journalists. for the most part, bloggers opine on the news or trends, while journlist cover the news. take a look at how often blogs cite the new york times. bloggers will not replace journalist but journalists will have to act more like bloggers by writing on the fly and engage in a two-way dialogue. a more accurate scenario is the two worlds will co-exist, although i suspect journalists will have to change a lot more than bloggers. as a former journalist (as of last week), most people are missing the point about bloggers vs. journalists. for the most part, bloggers opine on the news or trends, while journlist cover the news. take a look at how often blogs cite the new york times. bloggers will not replace journalist but journalists will have to act more like bloggers by writing on the fly and engage in a two-way dialogue. a more accurate scenario is the two worlds will co-exist, although i suspect journalists will have to change a lot more than bloggers.

]]> http://www.newsome.org/2006/10/blogs-papers-and-irony/comment-page-1/#comment-4203 mark Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:30:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/newsome/?p=3256#comment-4203 as a former journalist (as of last week), most people are missing the point about bloggers vs. journalists. for the most part, bloggers opine on the news or trends, while journlist cover the news. take a look at how often blogs cite the new york times. bloggers will not replace journalist but journalists will have to act more like bloggers by writing on the fly and engage in a two-way dialogue. a more accurate scenario is the two worlds will co-exist, although i suspect journalists will have to change a lot more than bloggers. as a former journalist (as of last week), most people are missing the point about bloggers vs. journalists. for the most part, bloggers opine on the news or trends, while journlist cover the news. take a look at how often blogs cite the new york times. bloggers will not replace journalist but journalists will have to act more like bloggers by writing on the fly and engage in a two-way dialogue. a more accurate scenario is the two worlds will co-exist, although i suspect journalists will have to change a lot more than bloggers.

]]> http://www.newsome.org/2006/10/blogs-papers-and-irony/comment-page-1/#comment-4204 mark Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:30:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/newsome/?p=3256#comment-4204 as a former journalist (as of last week), most people are missing the point about bloggers vs. journalists. for the most part, bloggers opine on the news or trends, while journlist cover the news. take a look at how often blogs cite the new york times. bloggers will not replace journalist but journalists will have to act more like bloggers by writing on the fly and engage in a two-way dialogue. a more accurate scenario is the two worlds will co-exist, although i suspect journalists will have to change a lot more than bloggers. as a former journalist (as of last week), most people are missing the point about bloggers vs. journalists. for the most part, bloggers opine on the news or trends, while journlist cover the news. take a look at how often blogs cite the new york times. bloggers will not replace journalist but journalists will have to act more like bloggers by writing on the fly and engage in a two-way dialogue. a more accurate scenario is the two worlds will co-exist, although i suspect journalists will have to change a lot more than bloggers.

]]> http://www.newsome.org/2006/10/blogs-papers-and-irony/comment-page-1/#comment-4205 Anonymous Mon, 16 Oct 2006 09:55:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/newsome/?p=3256#comment-4205 One issue I don't see written much about in this conversation is the organization of information. Let's say we get 10,000 citizen journalists to blog about an event. Assuming these people are primary sources for information - perhaps they live within the event as it unfolds - how to we make sense of all this data.Organized news media collects all this data, and filters it down into digestable chunks. If you want to learn about gardening, do you go to the library to read every book, go online and read every blog, and then do an expansive Google search? Or, do you go to Wikipedia, select two blogs from a Google search, and buy one thin book from Amazon?- <a HREF="http://www.danblank.com" rel="nofollow">Dan Blank</A> One issue I don’t see written much about in this conversation is the organization of information. Let’s say we get 10,000 citizen journalists to blog about an event. Assuming these people are primary sources for information – perhaps they live within the event as it unfolds – how to we make sense of all this data.Organized news media collects all this data, and filters it down into digestable chunks. If you want to learn about gardening, do you go to the library to read every book, go online and read every blog, and then do an expansive Google search? Or, do you go to Wikipedia, select two blogs from a Google search, and buy one thin book from Amazon?- Dan Blank

]]> http://www.newsome.org/2006/10/blogs-papers-and-irony/comment-page-1/#comment-4206 Kent Mon, 16 Oct 2006 04:44:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/newsome/?p=3256#comment-4206 Certainly there is a collective coverage via blogs that have great advantages. I completely buy that.My point is that the average American is a long, long way from looking to that collective process for news about certain news topics.Right now, there is a lot of criticism of traditional media- that it is too liberal, too conservative, etc. These are major networks with household names writing, editing and delivering the news. It's a big step from that to some possibly anonymous blogger with who knows how may biases writing about what is happening half a world away.Would I read such a blog- absolutely. I have. But would I look to that blog in lieu of CNN? Not a chance.Blogs and traditional news serve similar, but distinct, purposes. I don't think blogs can replace traditional news formats, and I don't think they have to to be indispensable.As more and more papers embrace the blogging platform, the line between old and new media will certainly blur.But the blurring force will come from traditional media coming our way by distributing its content via blogs- not from bloggers pretending they are the AP. Certainly there is a collective coverage via blogs that have great advantages. I completely buy that.My point is that the average American is a long, long way from looking to that collective process for news about certain news topics.Right now, there is a lot of criticism of traditional media- that it is too liberal, too conservative, etc. These are major networks with household names writing, editing and delivering the news. It’s a big step from that to some possibly anonymous blogger with who knows how may biases writing about what is happening half a world away.Would I read such a blog- absolutely. I have. But would I look to that blog in lieu of CNN? Not a chance.Blogs and traditional news serve similar, but distinct, purposes. I don’t think blogs can replace traditional news formats, and I don’t think they have to to be indispensable.As more and more papers embrace the blogging platform, the line between old and new media will certainly blur.But the blurring force will come from traditional media coming our way by distributing its content via blogs- not from bloggers pretending they are the AP.

]]> http://www.newsome.org/2006/10/blogs-papers-and-irony/comment-page-1/#comment-4207 Kent Mon, 16 Oct 2006 04:44:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/newsome/?p=3256#comment-4207 Certainly there is a collective coverage via blogs that have great advantages. I completely buy that.My point is that the average American is a long, long way from looking to that collective process for news about certain news topics.Right now, there is a lot of criticism of traditional media- that it is too liberal, too conservative, etc. These are major networks with household names writing, editing and delivering the news. It's a big step from that to some possibly anonymous blogger with who knows how may biases writing about what is happening half a world away.Would I read such a blog- absolutely. I have. But would I look to that blog in lieu of CNN? Not a chance.Blogs and traditional news serve similar, but distinct, purposes. I don't think blogs can replace traditional news formats, and I don't think they have to to be indispensable.As more and more papers embrace the blogging platform, the line between old and new media will certainly blur.But the blurring force will come from traditional media coming our way by distributing its content via blogs- not from bloggers pretending they are the AP. Certainly there is a collective coverage via blogs that have great advantages. I completely buy that.My point is that the average American is a long, long way from looking to that collective process for news about certain news topics.Right now, there is a lot of criticism of traditional media- that it is too liberal, too conservative, etc. These are major networks with household names writing, editing and delivering the news. It’s a big step from that to some possibly anonymous blogger with who knows how may biases writing about what is happening half a world away.Would I read such a blog- absolutely. I have. But would I look to that blog in lieu of CNN? Not a chance.Blogs and traditional news serve similar, but distinct, purposes. I don’t think blogs can replace traditional news formats, and I don’t think they have to to be indispensable.As more and more papers embrace the blogging platform, the line between old and new media will certainly blur.But the blurring force will come from traditional media coming our way by distributing its content via blogs- not from bloggers pretending they are the AP.

]]> http://www.newsome.org/2006/10/blogs-papers-and-irony/comment-page-1/#comment-4208 JoeDuck Mon, 16 Oct 2006 04:28:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/newsome/?p=3256#comment-4208 >>> It will be the same journalists who get paid for doing it now <<<Nope you are really missing the point. It's not 1 journalist vs 1 blogger, it's 1 journalist vs 10,000 bloggers.The journalist:1) Needs to sleep. Expert bloggers are collectively around 24/7/365 2) Makes far more than is needed to get quality informed commentary from bloggers3) does not live in the affected areas. This personalization is why blogs are already replacing mainstream.4) Is not even remotely as good as people like you think. My god, are you suggesting the jingoist FOX babes or even the very competent CNN world reporters can match thousands of citizens who speak the language and are in the line of news fire? Sure, I'd take an Ed Murrow in New York City over Joe Sixpack in New York City, but not reporting on Berlin, or Kabul, or Tashkent, or Baghdad, or ... >>> It will be the same journalists who get paid for doing it now <<<Nope you are really missing the point. It’s not 1 journalist vs 1 blogger, it’s 1 journalist vs 10,000 bloggers.The journalist:1) Needs to sleep. Expert bloggers are collectively around 24/7/365 2) Makes far more than is needed to get quality informed commentary from bloggers3) does not live in the affected areas. This personalization is why blogs are already replacing mainstream.4) Is not even remotely as good as people like you think. My god, are you suggesting the jingoist FOX babes or even the very competent CNN world reporters can match thousands of citizens who speak the language and are in the line of news fire? Sure, I’d take an Ed Murrow in New York City over Joe Sixpack in New York City, but not reporting on Berlin, or Kabul, or Tashkent, or Baghdad, or …

]]>