Up until about two weeks ago, I thought blogging was a way for distraught teenagers and middle-aged couch potatoes everywhere to digitally complain about their acne, glasses and insecurities to other distraught teenagers and middle-aged couch potatoes. When I thought of a blog, the last thing I associated it with was "professional" journalism. I assumed that keeping a blog was the same thing as keeping an online diary.
Particularly after reading chapters from blog! by David Kline and Dan Burnstein for my Digital Journalism class, I now realize that blogging can be a serious, legitimate endeavor. Select professionals have quit their jobs to blog full-time. I learned from blog! that "blog" was the most looked up word in 2004, and many daily newspapers have encouraged their readers to become "citizen journalists." Even major corporations are realizing that blogs are important for their business in terms of consumer demand; if they don't accommodate, their business will tank.
Some people even say blogging is and will continue to give a voice to those who have been denied such in the past.
While this can be true, I have a difficult time believing "news" delivered by someone under a pen name like Rainbow5000 or JustinIsMyHomeboy. Call me a traditionalist, but I have trust issues with online journalism, especially when it isn't showcased on an established web site like cnn.com. I realize that even major news networks can make errors, twist a story or even result to fabrication. But I have more trust in people hired to deliver the news in the name of an established news machine than a guy hanging out in his basement ranting about what HE thinks happened and delivering his thoughts as fact.
Even so, I do believe that blogging has a purpose and satisfies a void in society. People yearn to get their opinions out in the open, and thanks to constant access to technology, they can broadcast their opinions via the web with a click of a button. They can share their personal stories and viewpoints with the world and almost instantaneously receive feedback from fellow web users. This gives one a sense of importance; as David Kline said, blogging empowers. When a total stranger is writing comments on your blog--either encouraging you or expressing extreme disdain--it is gratifying to know SOMEONE cares. When you're sick of hearing feedback, or receiving none at all, from your friends, family and significant others, it can be nice to get a random opinion from cyber space.
I view blogging primarily as an outlet for commentary, not straight news. I find it odd that some bloggers go so far as to bash traditional forms of media like magazines and newspapers when the bloggers themselves are citing these sources for their own news stories. After all, they often can't be on the scene of an event reporting and gathering quotes themselves; and when they include information from these established news sources, it's like bloggers are saying they trust them enough to get it right. So then why would they want to regurgitate old news?
As I've previously stated, blogs are excellent venues to express personal opinion, bounce ideas off other web users and even share personal accounts. But even if I couldn't get ahold of a newspaper, news magazine or CNN, I probably still wouldn't turn to a random person's blog for my news.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Good post. You wrap a lot of personal and external voice together. Very well done.
A few thoughts on some of your ideas:
If a blogger is making money and actually works for a company, does that make him or her more credible? Why or why not?
Journalists often report abut events they did not witness. NO journalist was on the campus of Virginia Tech during the shooting last year. And they cited blogs and Youtube videos of the amateurs who were. What does this say about "being there" in terms fo credibility?
Just some things to think about.
Post a Comment