Just couldn't stay away
Am I the only who one thinks blog triumphalism strange? Whenever the blogosphere manages to sway the political debate somehow, there inevitably follows a number of comments about how blogs have finally made it. Or whenever some commenter claims he's renounced the feckless, imcompetent mainstream media (excuse me, MSM), I'm always confused. Then, most rencetly, there's been all the calls for Dan Rather's head on a pike by the right-wingers, despite the fact that Fox News fell for something even more dubious than the Killian memos: a Photoshopped picture that placed John Kerry next to Jane Fonda at a Vietnam protest.
I don't get it. It all just smacks of an Oedipus complex to me.
Media commentary is the reason these blogs exist. They depend on articles from the major publications for 99% of their jumping-off material. The commentary, the arguemnts, the vetting — that's all great, but it's no substitute for the work of professional journalists. Still, blogs are read by millions of people for a reason; they're not going away, no need to be insecure. Conversely, thanks to blogs I've been exposed to a number of publications that I may subscribe to, such as The Washington Monthly and The American Prospect. The relationship is symbiotic, not competitive.
So why all the animosity?
Am I the only who one thinks blog triumphalism strange? Whenever the blogosphere manages to sway the political debate somehow, there inevitably follows a number of comments about how blogs have finally made it. Or whenever some commenter claims he's renounced the feckless, imcompetent mainstream media (excuse me, MSM), I'm always confused. Then, most rencetly, there's been all the calls for Dan Rather's head on a pike by the right-wingers, despite the fact that Fox News fell for something even more dubious than the Killian memos: a Photoshopped picture that placed John Kerry next to Jane Fonda at a Vietnam protest.
I don't get it. It all just smacks of an Oedipus complex to me.
Media commentary is the reason these blogs exist. They depend on articles from the major publications for 99% of their jumping-off material. The commentary, the arguemnts, the vetting — that's all great, but it's no substitute for the work of professional journalists. Still, blogs are read by millions of people for a reason; they're not going away, no need to be insecure. Conversely, thanks to blogs I've been exposed to a number of publications that I may subscribe to, such as The Washington Monthly and The American Prospect. The relationship is symbiotic, not competitive.
So why all the animosity?
posted by Matt at 7:35 PM
|
<< Home