Feed Sign in with OpenID OpenID

Simon Willison’s Weblog

Blogging and journalism

I’ve been pretty much ignoring the whole “Blogging vs Journalism” thing but recently I’ve begun to understand what the big fuss is about. One of the most popular arguments put forth by journalists concerned by competition from blogs is that the information contained therein isn’t as reliable thanks to a lack of an editor to check facts. Rubbish. I can’t remember the last time I read a technology article in the main stream press about something I have more than a passing interest in that didn’t have at least a few errors. Some of the blogs I read on the other hand are written by subject matter experts—these people are not being paid to knock out 750 vaguely relevant words on a breaking story, they are voluntarily providing their insights because they are heavily involved with the topic at hand.

When Safari came out, who had the best coverage? Look no further than Mark Pilgrim. The Eldred case was graced with coverage by Lawrence Lessig, the man at the very centre of the story. I’m sure there are plenty of other examples.

So, for a lot of tech related news I find blogs a far more useful source of information than the mainstream press. The problem of course is one of reputation—before I can judge the value of a blog entry I need to know something about the blogger who wrote it. Part of this judgement is helped by links from bloggers who I already trust (the linking nature of the web at work). Unlike Tantek I still have a use for traditional media for my non-tech news, but as the blogosphere expands and new methods evolve for finding quality blogs on a variety of subject matter I can see my dependence on the media reducing even more.

This is Blogging and journalism by Simon Willison, posted on 28th February 2003.

View blog reactions

Next: Problems in Nirvana

Previous: Quasar usability

4 comments

  1. Definitely. I'm fed up with the whole debate. If you look at how sloppy a lot of journalists in newspapers are (esp. if you look at local papers), then good blogs seem far more appealing. Plus the whole "doing it for the love, man" attitude is better than people knocking out brainfarts on subjects they don't know or care about.

    Tom Morris - 1st March 2003 00:42 - #

  2. I definately agree with you with regard to the technical content of technology news in blogs vs. tradition media. Where traditional media has the edge for me is the coverage of current affairs and world events. In my opinion, the little coverage of politics and world news that appears in blogs tends to be quite opinionated. Yes, there will always be a personaly bias in writings about politics whatever the media, but I find that it is more evident with personal columns online.

    Matt Southerden - 1st March 2003 12:29 - #

  3. Absolutely. Where technical journalism is concerned in particular, what tends to end up in the mainstream press got there because someone paid enough to have their technology profiled. To find out whether that reflects any kind of tech "reality" you have to refer to technical blogs where you're likely to get a much more balanced appraisal. In it's most extreme form, consider how technologies like PHP and Python get next to zero mainstream coverage. It's only when you turn to blogs that you find out that they even exist.

    Harry Fuecks - 1st March 2003 13:48 - #

  4. Does anyone appreciate the difference between a journalist and a technology editor? The later is some with a degree and experience in engineering/science. The former has a degree in communication/english. Now, which would you whether have writing your technical articles? Unfortuantely, most mainstream "technical" journalist don't have an education or background in engineering/science. Therein lies part of the problem. Cheers. -- WSDtech

    WSDtech - 10th July 2003 18:46 - #

Comments are closed.

Previously hosted at http://simon.incutio.com/archive/2003/02/28/bloggingAndJournalism

A django site