Blogology: Quick Hits from the Sorensen Bloggers Summit Tuesday, June 20, 2006
Posted by Conaway B. Haskins III in Uncategorized.trackback
Cross-posted on Bacon's Rebellion.
A good number of bloggers have already provide ample overviews of the Sorensen affair, thus I will only add some key takeaways that continue to resonate with me. First, Michael Shear made strong arguments for why the vast majority of bloggers are not journalists in the classic sense, and Bob Gibson and others reinforced these points in their comments and in subsequent chats. The significant points of departure revolved around blogging's lack of self-policing with no widely accepted codes of conduct and ethics – and the dearth of editorial and institutional oversight or structure that is typical of most MSM endeavors. This blog, for one, has proposed some voluntary blogging standards of practice, and in light of what was discussed at Sorensen, I would offer that this idea is worth revisiting.
Reflecting on this, it seems that the real issue at hand is not whether blogging is or is not journalism but whether bloggers who are not reporters can be considered journalists on par with opinion writers and analysts. Seeing as how journalism is a broad field, and given the prevalence of "advocacy journalism" with the likes of The Economist, New Republic, Weekly Standard, and most op/ed pages, the disconnect seems to revolve around the absence of editors. In the end, that's more of a market innovation issue rather than a fundamental flaw of the blogging medium. In the end, those of us who aspire to raise our craft and produce MSM-quality work should not look to reporters like Mike as our standard, but rather to leading local, state, and federal opinion writers (unless we can play both sides of the fence like Norm's penpal, Jeff Schapiro). We can also look at local newsweeklies and alternative newspapers which tend to relax traditional notions of objectivity.
Second, Gordon Morse excoriated bloggers for shying away from covering and investigating public policy issues. He correctly noted that most political bloggers prefer the daily soap opera of politicking to discussions of critical issues of importance such as healthcare, public finance, education, and the like. In Virginia, the policy implications of legislative and bureaucratic actions are mostly left off the table of the blogosphere, despite going mostly untouched by the MSM. Waldo's General Assembly blogging and most of Bacon's Rebellion are notable exceptions, but for the most part, Morse's observations hold.
Third, bloggers better mind the store when it comes to campaign finance and election laws. One of the more fascinating tidbits that came out of the session on campaign finance (aside from the notes that my buddy Steven Sisson kept passing me) was that MSM institutions are mostly exempt from these laws due the press exception established by courts and legislatures. So far, the legislative and judicial branches have gradually granted status to bloggers, yet they have not delved as deeply into a universal standard of blogging as a MSM equivalent. However, some groups are pushing that envelope fast at the state and federal levels.
It stands to reason that since blogging is a communication medium, is an outlet for public service, and as bloggers are essentially "embedded citizen journalists" (not my creation), we should take steps to build an infrastructure for our own protection. Whether it is incorporating our blogs as businesses or non-profits, joining relevant associations, or banding together to create our own version of the Virginia Press Association, we would all be wise to pre-empt the courts and the legislatures just to be safe.
It will be interesting to compare and contrast the topics covered at the Sorensen Summit with those being developed for the "Bloggers United in Martinsville for free Speech" confab in August. Two months is practically an eternity in the blogosphere, and we will see if any of the lessons learned in Charlottesville will have any practical application in the interim. As I'm on the agenda as a presenter, I will definitely be paying greater attention not only to what I produce but what others do also.
“As I’m on the agenda as a presenter, I will definitely be paying greater attention not only to what I produce but what others do also.”
I am very pleased to read that! Conaway, what you produce blogging is a high standard. I cant wait to have some barBque and chat with one of my favorite bloggers!
Conaway,
It was a pleasure to meet you at the Summit. As far as you being a presenter at a blog conference, well, I see the audience as lucky in that scenario.
This too: I thoroughly enjoyed my participation in the C-Ville event. It was quite stimulating. And, I’m looking forward to seeing the process of setting some standards for today’s pamphleteers in Virginia. Let’s talk…
By the way, I’m pulling for the Heat (the game is on now). I saw Mourning play in a high school state championship game I covered. He blocked 10 shots. I’ve been a Zo fan ever since.
– Terry
Kilo, thanks, brother. I’m always down for some good “Q!” Just make sure there’s enough slaw to go around!
Terry – it was great seeing in Charlottesville. I kicked myself for showing up late to the RVABlogs event after Ross told me you’d come and gone. I think that things are ripe for the picking on standards!
Thanks for the informative post. Important issues were raised at the summit, especially on blogger ethics. I once was a journalist(a very long time ago) and I know that good journalists take their ethical obligations, both to protect their sources and to inform the public, very
seriously.
Also, the issues of protection of bloggers by the courts, such as covering them under state shield laws, and greater protection of their free speech rights when it comes to campaign financing is also crucial.
Blogging is new. Journalism at one time wasn’t the most respectable profession either. Remember the days of yellow journalism? Lots of reporters were far less reputable than the average blogger today is. The old 1930s play “The Front Page” was an exageration. But not by much.
Journalism schools, professional organizations, and the newspaper industry growing up led to greater respect and a greater sense of responsibility in the field of journalism.
I think that will happen in blogging too. But blogging, by its nature, will always retain a certain “free for all” atmosphere. Because unlike a newspaper, anybody with a computer can blog. And a decent Dell desktop is only $300 now.
Technology is a leveling process. But then, in the sixties, anybody with a mimeograph or a copy machine could put out a broadside or underground paper.
The world will survive the bloggers.
And thanks for the thoughtful essay.
There are those of us who do cover issues. Thus were one to examine, for example, dailykos, one would find devilstower and jerome a Paris regularly covering issues involving energy, and someone named teacherken (hey, that’s me) who does about half of his blogging on schools, teaching, and educational policy. Maybe that’s why the three of us were involved in putting together panels for Yearlykos.
And for what it is worth, if the MSM actually covered policy issues during the campaign instead of spending so much time on the horse race aspects of politics, then there might be some grounds for that particular criticism of bloggers, but in that respect we are certainly no worse than most of the main streem media, and usually one heck of a lot better than the electronic media.
I don’t regularly monitor this blog — picked up the diary vai the virginia blog feed over at raisingkaine
if anyone has a comment they really want me to see, send me an email at kber at earthlink dot net
I don’t know if we’re journalists, since we usually don’t make the effort to say how unbiased we are when we write slanted, opinionated pieces and call it news like journalists do.
We’re radio talk show hosts in print. We cover what strikes us as interesting to make a point.
My opinion? Why should we try and replicate what’s already there? Let the journalists be journalists. We make some monolithic Blog Association with “standards” and we’ll become just as boring as journalists are.
I think there are some journalists among the crowded field of Virginia political bloggers. I’m not so sure we need standards, though, nor am I sure that they would do any good. What would happen if a blogger violated the standard? There would be no way to stop them from doing so. It would all be voluntary – not much different from what we have now. If you want an association, I’m fine with that, whereby membership would require adherence to certain standards. But don’t we all kind of do that, anyway? I mean, look at your blogroll – don’t you weed out the junk there?
BTW – it was nice to meet you, Conaway!
You know, I’m of a mixed mind. I think that those of us who aspire to do more than simply offer up a thought or two should move forward with something of a next-level nature. Maybe it breaks down along the lines of political activists v. political writers in terms of what road you take. I don’t know. Or maybe it’s a matter of perspective only: I see myself as a writer who blogs, not a blogger who writes. I openly try to get MSM and political leader’s attention, and I’m not ashamed to admit it. That’s why I like the “advocacy journalism” model. In the end, to each, his/her own…
Not that ‘real journalists’ like Dan Rather bother to check facts when a story is exciting, but blogs can hardly be held to journalistic standards. In my humble, but accurate, opinion… blogs are places where people can express their opinion about whatever is bugging them. If a nugget of truth comes out, so much the better. However most people that take the time to contribute something, apparently believe strongly enough to make the effort.
This is where we have, perhaps, a higher moral standing than ‘real journalists’ since we admit we have biases and opinions… most ‘real journalists’ lie about it and tell us they are objective.
Perhaps if I lived elsewhere I would aspire to get the attention of the MSM. Around here, it’s pretty much a waste of time. And while I have gotten the attention of political leaders, it is not because I pursued it. I write because I have something to say. If somebody reads it, fine. If not, then that’s really OK, too.
Vivian – my thing is “to each his/her own.” When I started this blog, my intention was to influence things in a broad sense. I didn’t have any specific designs on getting the attention of any particular individuals or institutions, but as time went on, things just evolved. I take it as is comes.
For some people, simply letting off steam and putting ideas out there in the marketplace of ideas suffices. Other people seek validation by MSM, politicos, bloggers, etc. Neither mode fits me well. I just want to make a difference, but that “difference” is defined, in part, by how others respond. It’s about the adventure. That’s just me, though.
[...] Conaway Haskins is impressive in person, and reviews the conference in a thoughtful essay on South of the James. However, my favorite line is not in the original posting, but in a response to a comment when he adds “I see myself as a writer who blogs, not a blogger who writes“. Conaway cross-posted the same article on Bacon’s Rebellion and spurred some additional interesting discussions on blogging and ethics. This week, the Sorenson Institute profiles Conaway . Excellent choice. [...]
Conaway,
I don’t know if you remember me, but I had the pleasure of eating lunch with you at the Blog Summit. Just wanted to say hello. I was checking out your blog and very much enjoyed your comments. Have a wonderful day!
Elizabeth Hooper