Media Wars, Current Events, and Navel Gazing
Skippy the Bush Kangaroo was very excited the Daily Show saw fit to report CNN’s reading of Skippy’s blog on Inside the Blogs.
Can we all stop, take a deep breath, and stop navel gazing?
What is the difference between: 1. a middle school student clipping a newspaper article and reading it in front of the class with a bit of commentary; 2. a web site that reports links to news sources and adds a bit of commentary?
Absolutely nothing (SAY IT AGAIN…)
This Escher-esque mirroring of “I see you! Do you see me? Look at me! No look at me! God I feel so validated because they like me, they really, really do….(gasp.)
This has just got to fucking stop.
What’s worse, if we use the middle school analogy, it would be like newspapers and television now REPORTING what the middle school student said, and adding credence to it. Then, they hire said middle school student, and invite him to the White House to report on the president.
Are blogs revolutionizing media, or is media just further whoring itself out and diluting the idea of news? What is news anymore?
My bottom line: We need reputable news organizations that report hard news from a variety of objective sources. We need good analysis and commentary from a variety of sources. We need media finance reform so that media houses do not receive income from political candidates. We need open airwaves, not airways that have been pimped and played by public officials.
We need innovation when large media outfits do not report hard news, like smoking gun reports of a secret 2002 deal to wage war on Iraq between Bush and Blair that violates constitutional separation of powers. I don’t know how Charlie Gibson and Diane Sawyer, to name just two, sleep at night not having reported such an important, hardhitting news story.
But are blogs important? No. The information, the news, the facts, the analysis and commentary are. What is even more important is who we get them from, and whether they are objective sources of news, when it is news. And when it is commentary and analysis, is it well-researched, well-thought, or is it just a subjective rant?
May 12th, 2005 at 8:59 am
Who the hell is this “Doug McDaniel” anyway, who says:
Can we all stop, take a deep breath, and stop navel gazing?
As far as I am concerned, this whole piece is just another recitation of the old, tired, screwy mantra about how “everything should be left to professional bullshit artists.”
For every alleged “reason” in the thing above, there are 20 good reasons why it is wrong. The reasons why everything above is wrong are so legion [suc] that I can’t begin to spell them all out.
But, for one small example, the mainstream Fascist Media has an odd propensity to report things like Barbara Bush biting the head off a chicken in, say the Long Island Newsday — and nowhere else. So we catch these news orphans, and discuss them.
I must caution the above poster that it is illegal to critique the Internet without the proper state licenses.
May 12th, 2005 at 8:59 am
Freedom of the press is important only if the populace can exercise it, rather than a narrow few who have the capital to expound their narrow self-interests.
I vehemently disagree that blogs are unimportant. That’s like saying the videographer of the Rodney King beating was irrelevant. Or that Talk Radio has no impact on society.
As to the navel-gazing you refer to, I don’t get what’s wrong with normal human vanity that finds a small thrill from being mentioned before a large audience. Sure, if someone utilizes such moments to suggest they’re superior to every blogger in the universe, that boorishness deserves challenge. But it’s not a big deal to simply enjoy a moment of recognition.
There’s no doubt that reputable news organizations are beneficial to a well-informed populace. But pure objectivity is a myth. One may attempt to provide balance by noting opposing views, but I’d maintain many bloggers do that. If they follow by challenging the opposing point of view, that may not be objective, but it can be logical and it can yield truth.
You say “The information, the news, the facts, the analysis and commentary are [important].” I agree. And I agree that we must use logic to discern the difference between a well-done analysis and a rant. But I maintain that many bloggers are doing an excellent job of analysis, as are many commenters responding to posts.
The old saw that two heads are better than one is applicable. Fresh ideas and perspectives get advanced that one head could not possibly do, in this interactive medium.
Certainly, not every blogger does deep research and many analyses fall short of logical construct. But how does that differ from traditional news mediums with similar weaknesses so evident there?
I remain convinced that blogs are a critically important form of media, a revolutionary force, in fact. But just as before, with the corporate media, the consumer must use their own powers of critical t