FONT SIZE | RSS FEEDS EMAIL THIS PRINT THIS POST A COMMENT EMAIL ALERTS
View all blog entries
January 2009
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
« Dec   Feb »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
Monthly archives
CityBlog lends its dubious endorsement to these fine Internet products.
A blogger praises that crazy idea of words printed on dead trees.

Bloggers, reporters ... the robot journalists are gonna kill us all anyway.
Bloggers, reporters ... the robot journalists are gonna kill us all anyway.

In case you were one of those people living in the candy palace of delusion that holds that blogs will sweep in to save journalism from the not-so-slow death of print, well, here’s a blogger with a bone to pick.

CityLife contributor and blogger Josh Ellis has a thoughtful post on his site Zenarchery titled, “What Newspapers Are For.” It’s a reax to another piece in which new media hypester Seth Godin, well, builds himself a nice li’l candy palace of delusion about blogs and other unpaid forms of pajama journalism handily picking up where traditional journalism drops off (with Seussy, nonsensical guff such as, “The magic of the web … is that when the marginal cost of something is free and when the time to deliver it is zero, the economics become magical. It’s like 6 divided by zero. Infinity.”)

A snip from Ellis’ take on this crazy talk:

What newspapers have that blogs don’t — and can’t, and won’t for the foreseeable future — is full-time staff, who are paid a (presumably) living wage to do the kind of in-depth work that blogs don’t, can’t, and won’t for the foreseeable future. A staff writer can spend the hours in the library or the paper’s morgue and on the street interviewing sources, doing interviews and getting background.

Newspapers also still provide identity and legitimacy functions for journalists, particularly in the world of politics. Don’t believe me? Try to get White House press credentials for your blog. Call up your Senator and ask their press secretary to provide you with background and an official statement for a blog post you’re doing.

Read the full post here.

Post a comment!
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. By publishing a comment here you agree to the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the Online staff.
4 Responses to “A blogger praises that crazy idea of words printed on dead trees.”

Though blogging can be considered an actual “news source”, I completely agree with Ellis.

Blogging usually doesn’t contain the necessary research to really be considered an adequate news source–at least, not like one would find in real journalism.

What I think it all boils down to is not the validity of blogs themselves, but the validity of the “bloggers”. Written language is key to sharing and spreading ideas, and I feel no form of it should ever be looked down upon. You yourself just have to filter what news can be considered “valid” according to the different sources, whether it be through television, printed works, or blogs.

Written by: Autumn B on Monday, Jan. 19, 2009 at 6:24 PM

One thing I really like about paper newspapers is it is possible to FINISH reading a newspaper. Whereas when reading the news on the web, there is always one more story to read, one more link to follow, forever. With print news you are free until the next day, week, etc.

Written by: Jackie on Sunday, Jan. 18, 2009 at 8:38 PM

Fair point. Though Godin’s enthusiasm for citizen journalists writing for free really undercuts his limp allowance for serious journalism being paid for by, oh, nonprofits or philanthropy or whatever-but-I’m-sure-we’ll-find-something. Sure, there are models for this (http://www.cjr.org/feature/the_nonprofit_road.php), but it can’t be THE model. If there’s anything close to a working system right now, it might be the Huffington Post, in which advertising attracted by unpaid (and seemingly countless) bloggers trickles up to pay for an actual salary-making news staff.

Written by: Andrew Kiraly on Friday, Jan. 16, 2009 at 6:42 PM

Ellis has good points, but your headline is misleading. Josh wasn’t touting “newspaper” as printed matter, but “newspaper” as in a “news gathering organization.” I don’t think anyone was suggesting bloggers will replace reporters, editors, etc. It seems Godin’s point was that the excess crap in traditional newspapers — the redundant wire stories, the softball game “coverage,” the “style” type sections — are fat needing to be cut away.

Written by: Pj Perez on Friday, Jan. 16, 2009 at 5:49 PM
CityPics
Community photo sharing
View reader photos and share your own at CityPics