MSM.. oops, sorry
Writing about the media has never been my cup of tea, and yet, I feel strongly about how mainstream media or the MSM (i.e., the newspaper, the television and the online publishing houses) is seen essentially in a darker context by bloggers. Are they (bloggers) trying to settle a score for not getting the attention? Having the power to publish online alone is not enough to be news messengers.
If I understand it correctly, there is no competition between the main stream media (I should stop using this phrase, because it does not sound right) and the blogs. And there shouldn’t be. Because blogs do fill in many details on subjects by authority of the voice and add value to the news. Separating news from blogs and vice versa is like losing caviar from your favorite food.
So as Matthew Haughey says, let’s drop the “MSM” bullshit please.
The MSM, as they call it can never be overruled. The bloggers also derive their stories from MSM so I don’t see any sense in deriding them. But then again, bloggers-MSM rivalry is good for fact-checking and widening of the opinion circle.
Apr 29, 05 at 00:00Patrix: Yes, open audits by bloggers improves the quality of the media, which in turn, benefits everyone.
Apr 29, 05 at 09:21I am, I suppose, one of those who see the media in “darker terms” as you say. I think it is certainly a matter of perception. As Patrix pointed out, I do obviously derive a good deal of my content and knowledge of current events from the… err.. MSM. That said, I think people on both sides of this debate ultimately enjoy the same things about blogging: the ability to publish what you want and communicate directly with others.
The difference lies within that enjoyment. To make a generalization, I have noticed two distinct types of bloggers:
a) One type focuses on their enjoyment of the media itself. They are enthralled — and rightly so — by the technology that allows them to communicate, develop and share ideas with people from all over the world. Oftentimes they focus on the art of blogging itself as a main theme.
b) The other type tends to get more excited by the information that they access, affect and proliferate. The actual media itself can take a back seat to the communicative possiblities. This type will oftentimes attempt to fill a void that they percieve within normal or more readily accepted forms of media.
My favorite type of blog to read balances both. As far as Matthew Haughey’s rant… I think it just that. He is smart enough to substantiate his statements, but didn’t. He was venting, and I would conjecture that he vented from the perspective of the [type a] blogger.
He saw the trend of bloggers vs. the “MSM” as a rivalry. The optimism of the [type a] blogger does not like to draw distinctions between two forms of media that are evolving. This limits potential.
I, the [type b] blogger, tend to see the mechanisms that are drawing the distinctions — in effect, framing the rivalry. I focus more on the idea that the major media would prefer to control the evolving market as to make sure that it retains it’s power and does not cap its own potential. I would conjecture that if the battle is to retain power, the major media would have the most to gain by “framing the argument” to discredit or alienate bloggers.
This always happens at the advent of a powerful new technology. The printing press gave the christian church a run for its money when it began to revolutionize information distribution as well. Previously, the church had a monopoly over this, and it is well known that it didn’t like a challenge to its power.
Sorry this is so long-winded, and I don’t mean to polarize the two “groups” that I have gone ahead and labeled. I really just wanted to point out that both groups depict a different mainfestation of same excitement. The excitement of communication. The trap is to fall into one category or another and become blind to the other viewpoint. It is a combination of these types of bloggers that drives the evolution we are experiencing!
May 5, 05 at 06:35John, that’s a good viewpoint and on target. I couldn’t have said it with such finesse.
May 5, 05 at 06:57