Okay, just for fun, let’s review.
I’m the nice one. I blog about business, writing, and thinking outside of the box.
According to Tom Glocer, Trevor Butterworth, and Roger Parry, today in the Financial Times, I’m also a citizen journalist. I didn’t know that. Should I put that on my resume?
If folks from the old Media such as Tom Glocer, Trevor Butterworth, and Roger Parry can talk about me and other bloggers. I see no reason that I can’t talk about the three of them and their little talk today.
There were 15 questions asked by 12 people. The floor for questions was open for a week–since Mr. Glocer’s speech to the Online Publisher’s Association in London ran as Old media must embrace the amateur on March 7. You’d think they might have found 15 questions by 15 different people that were worth answering . . .
The last question and the one that seemed most relevant to us was
The blogging revolution is in its infancy as the web was in the late 1990s. Bloggers will become more sophisticated and organised over time. The blogging community will itself split ââ¬â between professional and amateur bloggers. Many professional bloggers will be experts in their own fields that do not have the desire/time to write for mainstream media. Add all these professional bloggers together (through technology or partnerships) and you potentially have the real challenge to old media in a few years. How can old media coerce or partner with a much more advanced and professional blogging community? Fighting hundreds of thousands of real niche experts will be a much different challenge. How can Reuters face this challenge?
Philip L Letts
If my search located the right Philip L. Letts, he appears to have an interesting business background. He also has several blogs.
Mr. Glocer’s answer showed a growing understanding, though he’s still breathing the air in the old media tower . . .
. . . I think media companies like ours need to experiment with both amateur and professional blogs. Reuters has been encouraging our own professional journalists to blog events, like the Consumer Electronics show ââ¬â so you should not expect all the ââ¬Åexpertsââ¬? to come from the outside. To attract outside professionals you need to offer a platform, an audience and a brand that is appealing. The war will not be won by coercion but by mutual consent.
Mr. Butterworth, who makes no bones about his dislike of blogs, showed both his arrogance and his belief in the use of big vocabulary . . .
. . . there is a much more fundamental question: how many readers do you alienate as a news organisation by indulging in blogging? I think you (and mainstream media blog evangelists) overestimate, at the very least, American appetites for bloviation. Branded opinions yes; what DaveSpart68 in Ohio thinks about George W. Bush, no.
Presently, the reality of the blogathons at some newspapers in the U.S. seems to be less expert disquisition and more inquisitorial musing on American Idol or Lindsey Lohan. Fine, clearly there is a market for this kind of pop cultural chatter ââ¬â but how much is it enhancing the newspaper as a business? Not as much as devoting more resources to producing original, insightful and well-written content, Iââ¬â¢d warrant.
Second, the idea that there are hundreds of thousands of ââ¬Åniche expertsââ¬? blogging away (or ready and willing to blog) lacks empirical evidence. Iââ¬â¢m very impressed with scienceblogs.com ââ¬â read the surgeon/scientist ââ¬Årespectful insolenceââ¬? and you get a real sense of how the mainstream need to upgrade their medical reporting. . . .
Mr. Parry, won my favor by calling things as he sees them with the fewest words and seemingly the most experience of reality . . .
. . . The degree to which a blog is interesting to people other than its author will depend on the subject matter, the authority, the level of ââ¬Ånewââ¬? information and the style of the writing. In short the most popular blogs will share the same characteristics as the most popular newspapers, magazines and broadcast programmes.
In some ways the blog is the digital version of the letter to the editor or the self produced leaflet but with the added dimensions or interactivity, real-time distribution and global access. The blogger who produces something of very narrow subject interest can still draw a sizable audience as they have the whole world as potential readers.
Existing media will have to embrace blogs as an enhancement to their content offer in the same way they commission articles from experts, run reader polls and invite letters.
Bloggers who do their job well will, like star columnists, attract a loyal following and will be paid (if they want to be ) to let their blog be aggregated into an existing media offering. . . .
I do have one question that didn’t get answered. If Tom Glocer, Trevor Butterworth, and Roger Parry got fired tomorrow, would they then be citizen journalists like me?
I wonder . . .
–ME “Liz” Strauss
Related articles
Financial Times Debate Onââ¬âShould Old Media Embrace New?
Tom Glocer Donââ¬â¢t Spin Stories to My Friends
Edelman Aces PR, NY Times Fails Research
Hi Liz,
Thanks for reading the debate. Let me try and answer some of your questions and address some of your points in as few, short, simple words as possible.
First, we didn’t “find the questions” – these were the one’s that were submitted.
Second, blogging has been referred to as citizen journalism in most of the discussions about the nature of blogging that were begun by bloggers. I believe the MacArthur Foundation is even disbursing grants to further citizen news gathering via blogging.
Now maybe the term is a bit high falutin’ for what you do, but the term is pertinent to the discussion of whether the idea of blogging as citizen journalism, which was the starting point for the Q and A.
Now you may find me arrogant and far too Latinate for your tastes, but I did bother – being a professional journalist – to do some reporting before answering these questions. And contrary to your claim that I make “no bones” about my “dislike of blogs,” you cite a passage in which I praise an entire community of them. Now, if you were a working journalist in old media, and I was your editor, I’d make you rewrite that section so it made sense.
As for what would happen if Tom, Roger and I became unemployed: well, Tom is a lawyer by training – and with his astonishing track record of profit at Reuters, I suspect, he’d have plenty of offers; I guess Roger would be in a similar position; me – as a freelance hack -well, I might try my hand at being a citizen strategic planner with a focus on niche-brand marketing – LOL!
Best –
Trevor Butterworth
Hi Trevor,
Welcome. Thank you for coming, and thank you for taking the time to write your thoughts here. I apologize for commenting on your arrogance, obviously I was reading into the white space around the print. Your visit proves me wrong on that. I’m sorry. I take those words back. I’m the nice one.
With regard to your “finding questions,” my choice of words was only referring to finding questions among those that were submitted. I’m sorry that wasn’t clear. Thank you for point that out. This comment will make sure that readers know.
I don’t find the term “citizen journalist” to be high falutin’ in any way. What I find is that the way it’s being used is exclusive and not inclusive, and frankly, Trevor, that’s what I find wrong with most of the conversation regarding bloggers and blogging.
“Citizen Journalist” is taking on the tone and timbre of a euphemism that means “less than,” “separate, but not equal,” “beneath the real ones,” and any conversation that takes place between old media and said “citizen journalists,” therefore becomes off-balance–unfairly weighted.
The statements I’ve seen in praise of “citizen journalists” all seem to be of the nature of “let them take the photos and get the first comments until we get there; then we’ll take over and do the real stuff.” That’s not praising that’s patronizing. It doesn’t matter that the occasional citizen takes a great photo and the old media holds it up. There is not an effort there to talk about the outstanding blogs–the untapped talent–the what ifs and what could bes.
As far as your “no bones about disliking blogs,” c’mon, Trevor, you’re the one who wrote “Time for the Last Post.” I’m not sure what you mean by that not making sense. You don’t really give mounds of praise freely there.
As far as what would happen if you three became unemployed, as we used to say in my editorial group, “in America we call that a joke.” LOL.
Come on and be a strategic planner and do some niche-brand marketing with me. That would be so cool! It’s way more fun than being a citizen journalist anyday.
Seriously, Trevor, I appreciate your stopping by.
Liz
I for one, am no journalist, citizen or otherwise. Business people have been writing for trade journals for quite some time for marketing purposes, but now that we control the publishing software, we’re also aspiring journalists? I don’t think so.
If Mr. Butterworth means we’re journalists because we try to stick to the truth and verify sources, perhaps he should compare us to someone else. Jayson Blair, Judith Miller and many others haven’t exactly made me aspire to the journalistic standard.
The Old Media is still good at the simplistic pigeon-hole… you can’t take that away from them. When something doesn’t fit into an existing box, they wrestle it in with a crowbar.
So it’s no surprise if they don’t get you, Liz. Be happy!
Hi Brian,
I’m happy! You can be sure of that. 🙂
I just like to give them back some of what they give out, especially when they use words to draw pictures of me and you that just aren’t true.
I have an highly-sensitized barometer of what’s true and what’s fair in the way that words are used. I guess you could say that on the “spin cycle,” I should be in the load that gets set on “gentle.” 🙂
I have very low tolerance for the media using euphemisms to give me back-handed compliments. Sometimes they don’t know when they’re doing it. Most times, I suspect, they do. Either way, I think they should be called on it, because such things have a way of being taken as true.
I don’t mind folks who come right out and tell me I’m less than they are and allow me to respond to it. Sometimes that the fact. I can deal with that fine.
I really mind when they pretend and use words that “say” we’re equal, but in reality, if you listen you know that’s not what they think.
My total agenda is a story that gives the real picture of what you and I are like. Not a rumor or a preconceived notion stretched into a caricature.
You’re much better than the person they describe as a “citzen journalist.” What’s happening to that term is the same thing that Christmas cards did to the word “joy.”
I’m an editor. I hate it when people kill perfectly wonderful words.
But I’m having a great day. 🙂
Smiles,
Liz
Do the media get things wrong? All the time. I launched a daily media criticism web site in 1998 (went bust 2000) and then took over a science-based media criticism project (stats.org) in 2004.
The arrival of the Internet produced a major existential crisis in the media: if anyone could publish a website, who was a journalist. Was journalism a profession or a craft or something anyone could do. It’s worth noting that after the massive upheaval in the American media created by the Yellow Press, Joseph Pulitzer established Columbia’s Journalism School with the goal of turning journalism into a profession like law or medicine. This reflected a concern for what happens when there are no rules or standards (something he knew more than most about as a Yellow Press baron) and a general cultural obsession with positivism.
These ideas continue to be debated in the media: profession or craft? I think the simplest way of dealing with this is to say journalism is a guild. It has its ways, and if you follow its ways you’ll get published and paid. Naturally, any insititution will grow stale – and there have been periodic rebellions – the underground press in the 60s was dubbed “do-it-yourself-journalism.”
Rightly or wrongly, blogging has been spun by certain blog evanglists into an army of citizen journalists that will, finally, destroy the hegemony of the old (Read Hugh Hewitt or Glenn Reynolds or Joe Trippi).
And nturally, hacks like myself take exception to these claims for a variety of reasons. Your average blogger-as-citizen-journalist is not going to spend a week – or six -digging through tax records or going to school board meetings, or cold-calling local government officials – as most tyro journalists in the U.S. have to do.
The apprenticeship one gets through journalism school and one’s first years on the job requires nothing more than curiosity, a thick skin, a willingness to work long hours for bad pay and an ability to write clearly (and one hopes, engagingly). This is a low barrier to entry (unlike medicine), but that doesn’t mean that the apprenticeship has no value. You learn how the world works. You amass an immense body of knowledge and experience (especially if you specialize in a particular beat, like covering the courts, or business), you develop a huge network of sources, who either are experts or players.
If you are lucky, you’ll work for a publication that passes on a tremendous amount of historical knowledge and experience of these areas – and will give you the time to do ever more serious, in-depth work as you progress in your career. Chances are, you’ll earn less than your professional qualifications would reap in a different profession
This isn’t the only way to do journalism – nor is it a foolproof way of doing excellent journalism. Every field has its share of malfeasants – and every profession needs to renew itself by thinking outside the box. But what irks many practicing journalists about the idea of citizen journalism (which, I know, should not be considered synonymous with blogging) is the idea that it denigrates the time served in the trenches- that this knowledge is worthless and can be replaced by an appropriate expert – or anyone for that matter – blogging.
Would you prefer a citizen paediatrician to a certified paediatrician? A citizen plumber to an experienced one? Then why assume that a blogger is equal to the defense correspondent of a national newspaper? Could a retired general blogging add something to a newspaper’s coverage of defense – absolutely. But that’s value added rather than value-equivalent.
Anyway, I have no gripe with anyone who wants to blog their hearts out. Go for it. But the movement afoot to see blogging as an information revolution imperiling old media journalism is less than the sum of its parts. All the comments about the old media not getting it have a certain amount of truth – although not in the way the commentators think. But what the blog-evangelists forget is that old media is run by people who have made billions – and who have a vested interest in continuing to make billions.
Best –
Trevor Butterworth
The preconceived mindset of Mr. Butterworth:
– Blogs are irrelevant, and will not become an important factor in media.
Statistics to back up that preconceived idea:
[quote]According to BlogPulse (by way of the Wall Street Journalââ¬â¢s ââ¬Ånumbers guyââ¬?) there are no more than 450,000 blog posts per day ââ¬â and that figure has remained static for about a year.[end quote]
—
My preconceived mindset:
– Blogs are relevant, and we are only at the beginning of what weââ¬â¢re going to be seeing with them.
Statistics to back up that preconceived idea:
According to Internet World Stats (www.internetworldstats.com), an International website featuring up to date worldwide Internet Usage, Internet usage has increased globally 182% since the year 2000. Yet even with that phenomenal growth rate currently less that 16% of the worldââ¬â¢s population has access to the internet. In addition, according to a BBC report from last August, on average the total number of blogs on the Internet are doubling every 5 months. Add these two factors together and you realize that there is a fundamental shift occurring in the way people will be accessing information in the years to come.
—
Now, I may not be a ââ¬Ëprofessional journalistââ¬â¢, but I can spin, too. The only difference between us is that I do not feel superior to Mr. Butterworth. I also do not feel inferior to him, and if you really boil this down that might be the real issue here.
Wow, Trevor,
Thank you for the well thought and expressed description of what a professional journalist is and what it takes to become one. You points are not only well-taken, but also well and thoroughly expressed.
I also agree with you about the blogging evagelists. I feel that way about all evangelists in general. My saying for such people is “The minute you feel righteous about anything, you are WRONG.”
The only point upon which I find discomfort is that somehow I, and others like me, keep getting lumped into groups where we don’t belong.
The broader conversation on both sides has a slightly defensive tone and uses words of control and permission, such as “allow and give” as apposed to “share and let.” There’s a mindset that showing through that needs changing here. That’s what I’m trying to point out. Only that.
Thanks for continuing our conversation. I like knowing more about how you see things.
Liz
>>>But what the blog-evangelists forget is that old media is run by people who have made billions – and who have a vested interest in continuing to make billions.
Yes, that’s what this is really all about. I agree with you there.
But blogging is a lot of things. Maybe using the term “citizen journalist” for those who want to play journalist is a good thing. Just don’t use the term “blogger” interchangeably with it. That’s just incorrect. All I share with those types of people is content management and publishing software.
Blogging is a lot of different things rolled into one silly name. Like Tom Glocer, I’m a former attorney. Also like Mr. Glocer, I make more money now than I did practicing law.
The difference is, I’m sitting here in sweats and a t-shirt! 🙂
Hi DavidC,
First I hope you don’t mind that I hot wired the link you left to the BBC report so that readers could visit it without any trouble.
I know the figures of which you speak, they’re very close to the ones David Sifry reported in his February State of the Blogosphere–Part 1 report. I’m not sure where Trevor’s are from.
Now, I may not be a ââ¬Ëprofessional journalistââ¬â¢, but I can spin, too. The only difference between us is that I do not feel superior to Mr. Butterworth. I also do not feel inferior to him, and if you really boil this down that might be the real issue here.
That is an interesting point you make and it’s very close to the one I’m making about why I don’t like the term “citizen journalist.” The way it’s used appears to be a put down not a holding up–an insult to folks like Mark Twain, not a compliment to outstanding and talented bloggers.
Liz
Glad you came back, Brian.
You make two really good points. Billions are important to think about. Billions make people think, say, and do think that they wouldn’t think, say, or otherwise do–don’t they?
I particularly like the point that the terms “citizen journalist” and “blogger” are not interchangeable. Thank you for saying that.
Why didn’t I find those perfect words?
It’s the human thing that when we know nothing about another culture, they all look the same to us, don’t they though?
Journalism is a calling that requires curiousity. I wonder why there isn’t more curiousity about us?
Liz
Great point, Liz. It is very difficult to force yourself to get close to something of which you fear. I am curious about tigers, but I donââ¬â¢t see myself crawling up next to one.
That may not be a perfect analogy, as I donââ¬â¢t see bloggers as the tiger in the face of traditional media (not yet, anyway). However, there is no doubt that there is a threat here, and it must be acknowledged.
I think that traditional media is making a fundamental mistake here with its (in general) response to blogging. Instead of attempting to marginalize bloggers they would be much better served to embrace them. The worthwhile ones will rise to the top, irrelevant ones will fall off the map. If they embrace change, and those bloggers that are currently and will in the future have an impact on media, they will have the chance to survive. To survive you must embrace change, not attempt to thwart it. You donââ¬â¢t have to look far these days to see companies (and entire industries) that are in dire straits due to their resistance to change.
Hi DavidC.
Ironically while you were writing that comment, I was over checking something at Tom Peter’s Blog . and your words
To survive you must embrace change, not attempt to thwart it. You donââ¬â¢t have to look far these days to see companies (and entire industries) that are in dire straits due to their resistance to change.
would be so at home there. He’s saying that and pointing out such companies all of the time.
Often the way to assess a situation is to look at the table to evaluate who sitting there has the most to lose. . . . then you will see who is talking from weakness.
Liz
Hey Liz,
I’m glad that at least Mr Butterworth stopped by to rebutt your post. I think it does show his professionalisim.
“I think that traditional media is making a fundamental mistake here with its (in general) response to blogging. Instead of attempting to marginalize bloggers they would be much better served to embrace them.”
I agree with DavidC, especially after the Wal-Mart flap last week. Eventually, the MSM will catch on and embrace the “Web Journalists” as tightly as the Advertisers have the Internet in general.
Joe
I urge everyone to track down (sorry, I don’t have a bootleg – blogleg? – link to hand) a recent article by the Wall Street Journal’s “Numbers Guy” that took a long analytical look at the blogosphere’s numbers. From the perspective of a rival medium to traditional news media – things are not good. Only five blog sites, for instance, made it above the statistical threshold (over 150,000 discreet monthly visitors) on the two systems advertisers use. By contrast, the New York Times online site had 29 plus million discreet viewers.
On a host of other measures, blogging numbers all show stasis or decline.
One other thing – I think people within the blogosphere don’t realise how much hostility non-media, non-blogging consumers of news have for the medium. There are good reasons for caution here – if you are a news organization.
Best – T
Hi Joe!
I think you’re right about things turning out as they will in the end. It just seems a shame that things can’t start out with thoughtful respect to begin with.
Why foks have to put people in boxes has always bugged me . . . we’re all individuals.
>>>I think people within the blogosphere donââ¬â¢t realise how much hostility non-media, non-blogging consumers of news have for the medium.
Yes, and who do we have to thank for that? Some of the bloggers out there? Sure.
The histrionics of the MSM? Absolutely.
Hi Trevor!
Taking your numbers on good faith, I trust your research as a reporter. We’ll try to track them down though. . . . Let’s address this point–of which you said you are not, or are you part of this group?
One other thing – I think people within the blogosphere donââ¬â¢t realise how much hostility non-media, non-blogging consumers of news have for the medium. There are good reasons for caution here – if you are a news organization.
It’s so often these days tha people have hostility for something they know nothing about where do they get that? it has to be from the media.
I don’t know that majority of bloggers consider blogging to be a news media. Where have I heard that concept? From the media.
It’ human nature to try to define what we don’t know and don’t understand. I’ll grant that. It’s also human nature to fill in missing information with a negative–you don’t have to prepare for a positive.
But the view the all bloggers consider ourselves a news organization is narrow thinking based on nothing that I can see. I ask sincerely are there statistics that support the idea?
Thanks for adding that very real perception to the conversation, Trevor. It explains a lot.
Liz
Brian,
Do you consider yourself as a blogger to be part of a faux or real new organization?
Liz
Hey Liz,
Now, I’m sorry I mentioned how professional I thought Buttersworth (it’nt that a syrup?) is.
I guess he’s just to lazy to look up, copy and paste this.
New Search Engines Help Users Find Blogs
Took .0012 seconds to find (computer’s slow today).
Joe
Hi Joe,
I hot wired the link so that readers could get to it more quickly. . . . Yeah I hear what you’re saying. Maybe he couldn’t recall just where it was, after all the new search engines only help blog users. LOL.
That’s another American joke-isn’t it? (big Cheshire cat grin from the nice one.)
Liz
This is a terrific conversation Liz, and it’s great that Trevor is willing to continue to step back here, into the fray. Well done.
The most striking thing here to me is the disparity in the mindsets between bloggers (myself included) and that of traditional media. I see blogging as a wild new world, with almost limitless possibilities, that is going to change the world as we know it. It’s obvious from the conversation here that many in traditional media discount the entire concept of blogging completely, to the point of total distain and mistrust.
It’s really remarkable, and very difficult to see this moving to a ‘common ground’ of cooperation and mutual benefit. How can two camps with such differing views of the world come together? Where do we start?
Liz, you know the answer to that. 🙂
Yes, it is fun. Isn’t it, David?
I appreciate Trevor’s interaction as much as you do.
You’re right the disparity in mindsets is striking. I was shocked by it at first. The disparity of response of bloggers to what the old media says at each turn is also amazing to me as well.
In answer to your last question, “Where do we start?” I think it’s just by getting used to each other.
Liz
Brian,
I assume you’re answering my question of whether you consider yourself a member of a news organization–real or faux. My guess is NO! You consider yourself a copyblogger of the first estate.
Did I win the money? 🙂
Liz
Yep. Don’t be dissappointed by the amount, though. 🙂
Whee, Brian!
is it twice as much as the zero it was last time?
I’m going to splurge and go 5 times the zero it was last time.
Way cool. I’ll be able to buy 5 times as many magazines and newspapers as I did last time!
Liz
I think Trevor makes some good points, but I also think it inevitable that the traditional media and its trained journalists will have to share more of their space with bloggers who may lack journalistic credentials, but are nonethless as articulate and professional as any op-ed columnist or journalist and increasingly, just as widely read.
I don’t think newspapers are going to disappear anytime soon, but then neither are blogs. The MSM have new competitors and it is understandable that some will take more time than others to adjust to these new circumstances. Over time standards will rise in blogs and the resources will follow.
In the meantime I get nearly all of my news online, from a mix of the MSM and blogs, but it is to blogs that I look to tell me what people are really thinking, not the MSM.
Hi Noel,
Welcome to the blog. Thank you for coming.
I agree that it seems inevitable that the traditional media will need to share their space with the more articulate of bloggers. I too get my news online from a mix of traditional and blogging sources. I don’t choose by media type–I choose by credibility of the writer and how well the writer gives a balanced picture of the event or story.
I appreciate your adding to the conversation Noel.
Thanks for stopping by.
Liz
Hey Liz,
I just have to keep coming back to see how things progress. Very well, by the look of things.
The conversation reminds me of the debate long, long ago in a gallaxy far, far away… the one between Radio and TV.
Seems to me, things worked out to the benefit of both in that one. (Did I mention movies and TV?)
I think that “time” will work things out just fine. Even the most stubborn on both sides will have to make concessions in order for both to survive.
Joe
Hi Joe,
Hey, don’t leave out the one between player pianos and real ones . . . 🙂
The most stubborn on both sides will be the ones that the ones who get together leave out–don’t you think?
Liz
Hey Liz,
I think you are right. The most stubborn will be left out in the cold, while the rest of us are nice and cozy by the fire.
Joe
(gotta stop using all those analogies)
J.
Keep on using analogies, Joe.
Analogies are the sound bytes of languages. They paint a picture in words and say things in shorthand. That’s why I used them–they’re way faster and communicate much more clearly most time than the 1000 words that it would take to replace them. 🙂
I like campfires. Are you bringing the stuff for s’mores?
Hey Liz,
I tried to paste a pic here of a s’more, but it didn’t work. (picture worth a thousand words).
Now my screen is all sticky 😉
Joe
Oh Joe, you should have used the non-sticky glue, silly.
Hey Liz,
Seriously, the reason I keep coming back is as much for the interaction you have with your readers as your sense of humor.
Not to mention the quality of your articles. 🙂
Joe
Hey Joe,
Have a drink from the sidebar. It’s the reason I keep coming back too! Thanks for saying so.
Liz
It’s a strange read this FT.com debate – they seem to be very disdainful of blogging.
Reading between the lines, it seems that Butterworth is secretly hoping (or knows something) that somehow blogging and the internet as a news source will collapse…
“The future is difficult to see: any number of economic or legal developments could end the freedom of the Internet as we know it now and revitalise news profits.”
Looks like he secretly hopes that rss will be legally put out of existence so that old media can continue on it’s merry way.
Oh my!!! – “Talking up citizen journalism, blogging and podcasting is creativity on the cheap.”
This all smacks to me of MSM suddenly realizing they have some real competition – and are not ready to accept it and/or don’t know how to respond.
That’s the whole beauty of blogging – it’s an individual thing. You want to be a “citizen blogger” then you are a “citizien blogger”. You want to be a “shock jock” then you are one. At the end of the day, it’s the audience who will decide whether you are a relevent or not.
And that’s the crux of the matter where we are right now: it’s the audience who wants to decide. We have all been given such power and it’s pretty hard to take that away. Information, and how we recieve it, is now controlled at the users end – each and every one of us.
I see a book in the offering, Liz:-) “the Rise of Niche Media”
Mr Butterworth’s second comment is well though out and should give bloggers an insight into journalism.
For me, I see myself simply as a freelance journalist who has decided to use blogging as his medium.
That’s just it, Martin. That’s just why I can’t set this one down. I don’t understand why other folks, other bloggers can’t hear the patronizing tone in the words that are being said. It confuses me when intelligent people I admire take the words on the surface and don’t hear the subtext behind them.
David Starling’s quotes in my earlier posts really say it the best–that blogs pose a threat from all of Michael Porters five forces, a threat of the nature that comes maybe once in a century. That would explain why the response is so confused and so emotional.
It must be hard for old media to believe that it’s real. Should we take this seriously or are we fools if we do? After all our responses are in print, recorded for posterity. The old media is probably more aware of that facet of this situation than we “amateurs” are.
All night I’ve been thinking of the words professional and amateur, and who gets to apply them. I’ve never thought of myself as a journalist–beyond the fact that I prefer usage to grammar–but I’m starting to think of myself as an analyst, because no one is taking the time to really think deeply and write about what is actually being said here.
What I read that is being left unchallenged is amazing. What challenges I see seem laden with personality and agendas that have more to do with perception than with what was actually said or presented as examples. There are so many sleight of hand tricks and hidden assumptions around this whole issue it’s almost mind boggling to try to unravel them.
Blogging mind boggles that’s what I’m trying to do. 😛
Liz
ââ¬ÅThe future is difficult to see: any number of economic or legal developments could end the freedom of the Internet as we know it now and revitalise news profits.ââ¬?
Martin, I believe what he is referring to is the very real threat that the telcos and cable companies could severely restrict or wall off various sectors of the Internet, because they control the pipes. It never occured to me that the MSM would be all for such a plan, but now that he mentions it…. Way to go Butterworth; you’ve revealed the evil plan to us silly little bloggers!
Butterworth is such a protectionist! You’d think he was Rupert Murdoch rather than a lowly ink-stained wretch, but at least he’s a step above us (in his own mind). 🙂
Brian,
Don’t forget where you are. Remember I’m the nice one. . . can’t have you saying ink leaves stains.
Thanks for the legal intervention here. I’d love you to elaborate on how the situation you speak of would change when the big cities such as Philly, SanFrancisco, Chicago, Miami, and New York go Wi-Fi. Does that make it worse or better, do you think?
Liz
Liz, wi-fi (or even wi-max) still originates at a pipe. The backbone of the Interent is not wireless, and wi-fi and other current wireless technologies are just the “last 100 feet” so to speak.
Here’s some scary reading for your folks. Maybe we should be worried about this, and start doing something other than worrying about what Butterworth thinks:
Saving the Net: How to Keep the Carriers from Flushing the Net Down the Tubes
Brian,
My question was really one more of the politics–with the cities a whole new layer comes in . . . telcos, media, and politicos at more than one level. Ewwwww.
By the way, I went to hot wire your link, and couldn’t get through. I guess folks are already following it. 🙂
Liz
The sever is slow. Funny, I’m rereading the article myself, and they do mention muni wifi as a work around, but it will require someone like to Google to provide us all with free access through an alternate Interent backbone.
Don’t laugh, many believe Google aims to do us that very favor. They’ve apparently been buying up tons of dark fiber from the telecom overbuild. They could completely go around the telco and cable companies, and they have the money to do it.
Then we only have Google to fear. Great.
Now let me see, if I’m hearing you . . .
Google . . . MSM/Telcos . . . Google . . . MSM/Telcos
Have I told you how much I love it that AT&T now owns SBC. I thought I had eradicated them from my life forever.
Google . . . MSM/Telcos . . . Google . . . MSM/Telcos
What has me confused is . . . Where do Microsoft and Amazon fit in all of this–when is Google buying them?
Liz
The telcos and cable could kill off all of those companies. You really have to read the article (by Doc Searls). It’s fascinating and disturbing, and it addresses all of your questions (so far).
And yes, SBC is the big bad gorilla. The comments from SBC CEO Edward Whiteacre alone will give you chills.
I’m off to bed!
Good Night, Brian.
Say “Sweet Dreams” to the kids for me.
Liz
I donââ¬â¢t understand why other folks, other bloggers canââ¬â¢t hear the patronizing tone in the words that are being said.
Let them scoff. We do. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. We certainly don’t mind voicing ours.
I agree with you on choosing what to read according to the reputation of the writer, not the medium.
Hi Noel,
I agree. It’s not the scoffing that bothers me. It’s the fact that so many can’t hear it. . . .
Did you see that your logo made the front page of Successful-Blog today?
Liz
More on the “privatized pipes” issue:
Don’t Be Neutral on Net Neutrality
Thanks Brian,
I’m taking it all in. I’ll be putting it out again soon. You can be sure of that.
Liz
Yes, I had noticed, but modesty was forbidding me from mentioning it. However, now that you’ve raised it …
Well, Welcom, Noel.
No need for modesty here–honest acceptance is our policy. Sit enjoy. The snacks and beverages are in the sidebar.
Liz
Hey Liz,
Some teachers and savvy pols seem to be getting the idea.
caption in the Seattle Times from:
Creating a new democracy
“Lagos’ students talk about the importance of the Internet and blogs to reach young voters and as a way for the young to extend their reach across the years. Carl White talks about the importance of community involvement.
A tech-savvy, engaged political bloc would be hard to ignore. It is not too late for us to make the right choices ââ¬â choices that mold a modern democracy and sustain it another 229 years.”
Ryan Blethen’s column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times. His e-mail address is rblethen@seattletimes.com
Just something I came across that I thought was relevant, even though the MSM might not think so.
Joe
Hey Joe,
That sounds considerably relevant. I’m going now to hot wire the link and check it out. I guess you’re officially a citizen journalist.
Thanks for adding to the conversation.
Liz
Hey Liz,
🙂
Joe
Hey Joe,
I just finished reading it. It was good medicine for the spirit. I’m the one who should be sending you the big grin. 🙂
liz
I am extremely late to this debate – but I just discovered it. You did find the right Philip L Letts and I would have loved to comment.
Next time just ping me.
And, look at one of my blog channels http://www.business-rant.blogspot.com – it reveals (thanks to Jupiter Research) that 17-24 year olds now read blogs AS MUCH as newspapers!
Hi Philip,
I think I tried to ping you at the time, but I was having a problem with WordPress. I’m delighted that you found this post and most intrigued with your insights. I’m sorry you missed this discussion. I’ll be sure to keep you apprised when I decide to stir up the pot again.
Liz
Well, the thing about citizen journalist versus paid journalist comes back to the issue of power…which I have been thinking about a lot lately. I googled ‘lust for power’ this AM and it has my brain burning.
If the citizen journalist…and I agree with you, Liz, I use the term only for the sake of this discussion..has as much of a following as the paid journalist, then why should he get paid? Also, the folks who make their living controlling and directing public opinion are probably yanking their hair out right now because I, as an aspiring blogger and one who cannot be swayed by After School Specials masquerading as news reports, intend to hold forth and hopefully sway others to my way of thinking on a number of things. Perhaps the blogosphere in no small way is contributing the net neutrality controversy? It may be something to think about.
If you have the power to sway opinion and gain devoted readers through talent, then lots of people with industry jobs and letters after their names start questioning themselves…or worse, others start questioning them. Mr. Butterworth in particular sounds like anyone else who sees himself becoming increasingly irrelevant. Instead of looking for the opportunity hidden inside the challenge, he tries to criticize those who want to take advantage of it.
The blogosphere gives me hope for the future of Freedom of Speech and the survival of democracy.
Hi Tim!
You found what made me write this post in the first place. That folks on high would deem to give me and others a name that they pretended was one thing, but really was meant to keep us labeled as not them.
Though the media has changed position grossly since this moment in the past, I think it was forced to find a stance of acceptance. I buy completely into what you say here — Instead of looking for the opportunity hidden inside the challenge, he tries to criticize those who want to take advantage of it. The industry was doing that.