ddt and hate encrusted eyes pretty well covered what i was going to say, but still, let me reiterate:

one of the perpetual feedback loops this argument gets into is the mis-defining of “journalist” to mean both “reporter” and “pundit” in terms of what bloggers are/are not/can do/can not do/want to become/have no chance in hell of becoming.

granted, there are very few bloggers who actually investigate and report (brad friedman of brad blog comes to mind as an exception, as do epluribus media’s exposing of jeff gannon/guckert, as well as talking dog’s several interviews…and i even once interviews a communications professor at quinnipiac u. about lamont/lieberman and the role of blogs therein).

so no, blogs will never replace the billion dollar infrastructure the big media have in place to actually report on a story.

but to comment and analyze and pontificate…well, hell, every jerk in america has been doing that for a gazillion years. it’s only now with blogs that the big guys in the ivory towers have been made aware of it.

and yes, a lot of the analysis not only holds up to the george wills and tom friedmans of the big media, it often surpasses that which we must pay $$ for.

that’s what scares the big media.

and as hate encrusted eyes pointed out, the actual standard of “good” journalism has been slipping exponentially in the past decade, so any new media that points that out has got to be considered the enemy.

anyway, i was going to write about all that, but sj told me to stop writing. so i gues

.

.

True, though I’m sure for every Thomas Paine there were a dozen proto-Malkins — same problem of how to distinguish when someone forces on you a tract. We, the general populace, are not trained to be able to dig out the good and bad; we’re trained as consumers from birth, so we know how to follow and trust known brands.

This is the rub so to speak, the issue that makes the Steve Johnson’s of the world pick up a pen and doodle a few phases on fullscape, review, type into the word processor and submit to their favorite publisher.

I can’t really do the topic justice at 11:42 during my coffee break but if I could make a short observation, I would say that there is something about the absolute lack of professionalism of the current official press, especially with regards to politics, that has diminished the very meaning of the words: professional journalist. It is one thing for the hacks and hitmen at FOX lie to our faces, they are a terrible influence on Americans but they are becoming increasingly transparent to all and one hopes a bit of a joke. But when the AP staff starts getting played by Rove and the RNC you know that Columbia just ain’t making them the way it used to.

The political blogs are pointing at journalism’s fallen standards in the face of political manipulation and the press doesn’t like it, no one would, but hopefully this will help journalists recover their ethics, an ethic that puts the public interest before corporate loyalty.

Ha. I totally see that. Jumping up and wiggling aorund all excited all the time, humping your leg, chewing on your shoes, then finally piddling on the carpet. Always straining at the leash on a walk and barking incessantly at random air molecules…

Gary all the way. Excellent work Marq.

Gavin used the expression “the fact is” in the post. Gary Ruppert showed up and did not use this phrase.

VICIOUS LIES!!!11!! My computer is no longer brokitybroke.

Democrats support Bush’s foolish guest worker plan. They should remember that Americans are not stupid enough to fall for opportunists.

That’s awesomely incoherent, Gary. More proof that the GOP is a pathetic failure- their lapdogs can’t even write coherent talking points anymore.

I’m just riffing here: first, it seems that we’ve taken the term “blogger” and assigned all sorts of connotations to it, which in turn confuse the issue. Personally, I think the sooner we lose that whole term, the better.

Second, there is the (more) substantial issue of professional v. amateur, made more critical given the nature of this interweb thing. It’s easy to differentiate Newsweek, your local free weekly paper, a FSG book and a hand-photocopied ‘zine. We’re used to that, so it’s easy for us to navigate relative trustworthiness and social status. The more sophisticated technorati (I use this term ironically) can tell a MySpace page, a crappy Blogspot attempt and Juan Cole’s site apart. But how are most people to weigh the value of Josh Marshall, Pam Atlas and so on — the good readers of this site are in the know, but that’s their own damn fault.

If I were to hand you a bunch of names of Euro’ bike racers and ask you to tell me which ones are fit to comment on Algerian cattle production, how would you be able to respond?

That’s the value, right now, to most people of Big Names online. They know that CNN will have facts, etc. And to some degree, they’re right — there is an infrastructure in established publishing concerns for fact checking (oy, I have to get sources to my own editors tonight), error correction, etc. As for them bloggers, as far as most people are concerned, we can only take their “to live outside the law, one must be honest” word for it. Or rely on other voices in the blogosphere, which just means we shift the problem to statistics.Or you have to spend a hell of a lot of time on your own, reading TPM, or Instapundit, or Dr. Cole, or looking up primary sources (ha! yeah, I cracked myself up — who does that?).

Do I have a point? Or am I starting to sound like SJ?

My lawyer GF said to me that published is published, in the eyes of the law, and putting something online is publishing, so she thinks it’s cut and dried.

Of COURSE a technological sea change like that which is being enabled by blogs is going to change the way stuff is done. The gatekeepers are out of the game. But there is, and will continue to be, that small nagging matter of credibility. So nothing is replaced, everything evolves. As it is now, as it has always been. A men…

mikey

Democrats support Bush’s foolish guest worker plan. They should remember that Americans are not stupid enough to fall for opportunists.

Gary, last week weren’t the Democrats moving ‘sharply to the left’ as evidenced by the primary win of Ned Lamont? this week they’re moving right? It’s not a dance, Gary, which is it?

Democrat’s supporting Bush’s plan? I though we were unreasoning Bush-haters, who oppose anything Bush proposes. When did Kos change the orders?

Some Americans MUST be stupid enough to fall for opportunists; they all voted for Bush.

There HAS to be more than one Garybot running around out there, like several hundres Tom Servos. There’s too much cognitive dissonance for one person, even your basic wingnut.

and has SJ really adding anything of substance himself? Shouldn’t he pick a new topic?

But l4m3, you post like once every week or two!

Reading SJ also felt like I was watching a man join a group that’s flogging a dead horse, and begins to flog away at it himself. He then intones in a Geroge Will way that the activity in which they participate is called “beating a dead horse,” and that it’s annoying how all of these people are all into beating dead horses these days. Instructing all to watch his form, he gets his last few licks in, and says “unless you have a flourish to add, STOP BEATING THE DEAD HORSE.”

It’s like Captain Obvious, Mr. Me-Too, and his brother Too-Coo-Fo-Yoo all in one.

Message received, Gary, my man. The Reich Wing can continue to claim that shit as its own, and you’ll get no argument from me.

I’m still waiting for the late-afternoon traffic to start up here, but why are people popping up to defend Johnson? It’s almost as though being a moron is okay if you can write checks and buy attention.

Surprised at you guys.