Desicritics Comments on What Differentiates Journalists and Bloggers - Money?

Comment by Homework Help

Mon, 28 Jan 2008 02:25:13 EST

Homework Help http://www.masterpapers.com/homework_help_essay.htm Frequently the reason behind the desire to write this type of paper remains unclear. However, once the events are recounted and recorded, it becomes clear that the writer is striving to find the universal truth.Homework Help

Comment by Chandra

Sun, 27 Jan 2008 21:47:55 EST

Sujai Journalists are not necessarily accountable.One recent story i have been tracking is the recent violence in my home state of Orissa. It took about 10 days for the real story to emerge while in the meanwhile every tom dick and harry whipped up a frenzy about it being VHP sponsored violence. During the last 6 months, i have personally written to CNN IBN atleast half a dozen times to modfiy their stories because of factual errors. Everyday there are 100 such exaples. There is a huge market for the truth squad.

Comment by Sujai

Sun, 27 Jan 2008 14:45:30 EST

I can see two differences between bloggers and journalists: #1 Journalists (as employed by media giants) are accountable. Journalists are supposed to do their research (sometimes they don't). And when you see an article in a newspaper, you naturally assume it is authentic (sometimes not). Bloggers don't necessarily have to be accountable. If someone points out- 'hey, thats a glaring misrepresentation', you say, 'so what? its my blog' [I exaggerated the above to highlight the differences. There are exceptions where journalists have taken this 'onus of accountability' for a ride, while some bloggers are considered pretty serious - more than some journalists.] #2 Volume of readership affecting your business When Gurcharan Das writes for Times of India, his single column on a day get readership from millions. My entire blog for two years had around 100,000 views (with many casual glances). Readership ties to business. Ties back to accountability.

Comment by kerty

Sun, 27 Jan 2008 14:13:36 EST

Chandra.. The problem with journalists and reporters and editors is that they does not have to be accountable to anybody - not to government, not to people. They feel they own the political process and public domain and act as activists and advocacy groups. They become watchdog and defender of their own vested interests. They don't care for readers. They know readers expect to be spoon fed - and those readers who object or point out lack of objectivity, well that is tough luck. Try sending your letters to the editors - they usually get flooded with them, and have set procedures to cherry pick pick few and discard the rest. TOI allows you to post readers comments on their website and I must have sent hundreds of comments to TOI over years, but so far, they have published none. The Hindu and Telegraph do not even allow to comment on their websites. They know that no matter what, some readers will always disagree with one thing or another. So they develop think skin, so readers' reactions can't get to them. They insulate themselves and see only what they want to see and say what they want to say. On events and issues that don't effect their own agenda and party line, they might not mind going to extra length to be investigative, unbiased, factual and responsive to readers. Sorry state of politics and unenlightened electorate is a reflection on state of media. Indian media can get away with a lot which American media can't. But than American media has its won demons. But to its credit, American media does show sensitivity to American people, America's dominant political establishment and its national and security interests. However, when it comes to India, American media dutifully toes US state department's line and act as outpost of Indian leftist media. When it comes to India, American media tend to exert even more leftist bias than Indian leftist media.

Comment by bd

Sun, 27 Jan 2008 14:00:39 EST

SS, thanks for the comments, yes, that they do indeed, but frankly, so do many bloggers. So the numbers would be quite the same (see the global voices website for example). Secondly, bloggers live and die on their online reputation, just like journalists have a professional reputation. If I wrote rot, then nobody will read me. If I am biased, then I would not have a balanced readership and will be killed by the others. So bloggers also operate under the same pressures. And I am afraid I cannot agree on the bias bit. See my previous post on that, human beings are biased, period. Nothing wrong with that, but they all come with their own biases, points of view and perspectives. So bias exists, that is given. The question is, how much do you go to cover that? That goes back to the online reputation. If you are a rabid right wing hack, then your reputation is biased but people will read you. Think about it, even a doughty old institution such as BBC is well known to be quite biased. If the BBC is such, what hope for others? :) cheers bd

Comment by bd

Sun, 27 Jan 2008 13:51:14 EST

Comment by Chandra

Sun, 27 Jan 2008 12:33:12 EST

SS I donot agree with your assessment at all. The incidence of dumbness amongst western media outlets is high as it is in India. You only have to follow the election coverage in the US or the kind of stories published here in the UK to make the judgement. The quality of research and interpretation is missing in most cases. The reality is that most Politicians and journalists are scum of the Earth, anywhere in the world.

Comment by smallsquirrel

Sun, 27 Jan 2008 08:51:34 EST

oy chandra, that might be true of the rags here but there are many fine journalists throughout the world. BD... I think I can help you a bit with this. many, although certainly not all, journalists are kind of topic specialists. they do a seriously large amount of research, they take ages to build contacts in the specialized area they write about, they have to build the trust of the community they are covering and balance that with the need of the readership. this is a tough act and required a lot of specialization. now take, well, your blog for example. since you cover so many things, chances are that you are specialized in one, know a lot about a couple others, and spout off on many... :) but when you're blogging you don't *necessarily* have a responsibility to your readership to be unbiased or educated, depending on the slant of your blog. you can give an opinion that purposely leaves out whatever you want or mean to leave out without disgracing yourself or having some editor and fact-checker hanging your arse out to dry. and by the nature of how you have framed your blog, you have the license to do that. it doesn;t mean that bloggers do not cover serious topics or are not experts, it means how they frame their piece is how it is taken.... news is pre-framed and is meant (and doesn't always make the grade) meant to be unbiased. does this make any sense?

Comment by Chandra

Sun, 27 Jan 2008 04:17:47 EST

Journalists Average IQ- < 30 Quality of analysis - 2/10 Quality of forecasts - (-1)/10 Ability to choose stories- (-10/10) Overall rating - 1/10

Comment by Chandra

Sun, 27 Jan 2008 04:17:47 EST

Journalists Average IQ- < 30 Quality of analysis - 2/10 Quality of forecasts - (-1)/10 Ability to choose stories- (-10/10) Overall rating - 1/10