« Blogger Accuses Thompson Of Election Violation | Main | You Can't Help But Laugh »

Gross Generalizations About Old And New Media

I spend a fair amount of my time here coming to the defense of blogs when journalists attack. Today a little role reversal is in order thanks to James Lewis at American Thinker, who in a rant against the press penned this gem about "The Media Mob":

Like other unaccountable elites, they are monumentally fickle, self-indulgent, snobbish, vain, vulgar, entitled, incestuous, arrogant, ignorant, unprincipled, hysterical, and demagogic. They sound like a unified chorus for the same reasons that street mobs run as a group -- because by and large, they don't dare to stand alone.

Were a journalist to write something like that about blogs, the blogosphere would be up in rhetorical arms, and rightfully so. Journalists should be no less furious when bloggers engage in such unhinged, stereotypical blather. It is especially bizarre to hear Lewis, whether rightly or wrongly, bashing the media as a "mob" when bloggers pride themselves on their ability to "swarm." There's no difference between the two behaviors.

Two columns in The Washington Post precipitated Lewis' insulting invective, but he didn't limit his criticism to just two journalists. Instead, he tarred the entire media with the same broad brush. That's exactly what journalists do to bloggers, and it's unfair in either direction.

Many of the same adjectives that Lewis hurled at journalists -- and plenty of others -- have been aimed at bloggers by journalists. This week's anti-blog screed in the Los Angeles Times is a perfect example. Here's a nugget from journalism professor Michael Skube that adopted a tone as derisive as Lewis' blog post:

One gets the uneasy sense that the blogosphere is a potpourri of opinion and little more. The opinions are occasionally informed, often tiresomely cranky and never in doubt. Skepticism, restraint, a willingness to suspect judgment and to put oneself in the background -- these would not seem to be a blogger's trademarks.

Skube's commentary undoubtedly is true of specific bloggers, but he clearly has contempt for the blogosphere as a whole. Ironically, Skube is now the legitimate subject of blogger scorn for engaging in shoddy journalism after admitting that he hadn't even read some of the specific blogs named in his piece.

Sometimes the outrage about both journalists and bloggers is warranted, and sometimes it's intentionally exaggerated to make a point. But too often, the criticisms cross the line into inexcusable bigotry. The critics become like the very people they revile.

It's just plain wrong to demean an entire segment of the media, whether old or new, based on the flaws of a few practioners within it. The modern media world would be a far better place if the converging interests would crank the cynicism and animosity down a notch or three.

Oh, how I wish Jay Rosen, a more enlightened journalism professor than Skube, had been right back in January 2005 when he said "Bloggers vs. Journalists Is Over." Alas, the rivalry is still going strong, and it has left both fighters with eyes swollen shut.

Posted by Danny | 11:18 AM

Comments

I was initially tempted to agree with the temperate-sounding argument made by Mr. Glover but it obscures the fact that the traditional media and blogosphere were/are not created equal. Blogs are generally, and many by definition, defined by their ideology. The MSM has presented itself for decades as objective and unaffected by individual political persuasion. Many have argued quite persuasively that this self-characterization is fraudulent. Until the MSM can show itself by end-product to be unbiased or openly admit the bias, then I believe the blogs have the high ground to take their shots.

John | 08.22.07 06:08 AM

My biggest problem with bloggers is their lack of accountability. They ... don't respect original ownership whatsoever; at least newspapers pay for wire copy.
And while some bloggers do good work, such as uncovering the shenanigans at Walter Reed hospital or exposing Mark Foley's dirty emails before the MSM would pay attention, the majority of these bloggers do little more than rant their opinion, over and over and over again, skewing the facts to fit their arguments.
You should see how they spin facts down here when it comes to immigration; they don't say anything new, they just bark a lot.
Media has its own problems alright, but at least the faults are outnumbered by legitimate hard work.

Michael | 08.22.07 05:28 PM

As a veteran journalist, blogger and journalism teacher, I find this us vs. them argument being waged between the newsroom and the blogosphere to be tiresome and misguided. Where would the journalism profession be without frank media criticism, the kind bloggers are delivering on a refreshingly consistent basis? In this vain, bloggers' collective thin skin baffles me. Why would you bristle at the notion that you too should be held accountable for your reportage? ... But the most troublesome viewpoint of all is from professors who adopt the Skube rationale that nothing newsworthy, by definition, can come from a blog. Do us all a favor and hang up your badge. If there is any accountability left in academia, someone should show you the door.

Bernhard Warner | 08.23.07 06:23 PM

Post a Comment