Comments on: The Critical Difference Between Blogging And Journalism

By: Meet the New Influencers, Same as the Old Influencers (?) | Common Sense

Meet the New Influencers, Same as the Old Influencers (?) | Common Sense — Thu, 02 Dec 2010 16:56:36 +0000

[...] Part of the motivation for moving away from labels is that they are all too often misleading: for all the hue and cry about the death of “traditional” media, most of the top online news sites are extensions of existing print, radio or television institutions. But I was curious how those sites stacked up in the “sharability” department. (I was prompted, in part, by my colleague Marshall Sponder, who included a link in his post of two weeks ago that suggested old-school journalism was less “engaging” than blogging.) [...]

By: » On line e off line, varie ed eventuali ajelli.it

» On line e off line, varie ed eventuali ajelli.it — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 10:13:47 +0000

[...] La guerra tra e-edition e carta stampata è sempre più combattuta come dichiara Niemanlab anche se le battaglie non sempre le vince l’on line. Chiude infatti il Washington Independent, pioniere del giornalismo sul web, mentre una nuova testata on line si affaccia oltreoceano: Rupert Murdoch fonda The Daily insieme a Steve Jobs, nuovo giornale digitale privo di edizioni web, accessibile solo tramite tablet e applicazione dedicata, la cui sede è tuttavia reale e si trova presso gli uffici della News Corporation a Manhattan secondo il New York Times. Ma l’evoluzione del panorama mediatico non si quieta: si afferma un nuovo sito web di giornalismo digitale, owni.eu, e un altro twitter friendly su cui ognuno può creare le proprie news, paper.li. Intanto c’è chi pensa a fare ordine: quale differenza tra blogger e giornalista? Una definizione convincente la fornisce Jason Falls, speaker e libero pensatore americano : il media tradizionale è prodotto per il consumo, quello moderno per l’impegno. Per ora. Su Social Media Explorer. [...]

By: Kristy Dolha

Kristy Dolha — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 19:29:26 +0000

I also write in both arenas…as a journalist, and as a blogger, and I agree that they have completely different functions, and therefore should be approached differently. As a reader, when I want to be informed, I seek out journalistic articles, but when I want to have my opinions challenged, explore different viewpoints, or feel connected with other individuals, I look for the blogs. Each offers value!

By: Using Radian6 to surface the most Engaging Content | Common Sense

Using Radian6 to surface the most Engaging Content | Common Sense — Wed, 17 Nov 2010 20:30:03 +0000

[...] Jason Falls over at Social Media Explorer expressed his opinion old media was about “consumption” and new media was about [...]

By: links for 2010-11-16

links for 2010-11-16 — Wed, 17 Nov 2010 05:04:04 +0000

[...] The Critical Difference Between Blogging And Journalism [...]

By: JasonFalls

JasonFalls — Tue, 16 Nov 2010 06:17:15 +0000

Good question. Moderation isn't an issue, so long as the blog allows

anything through that doesn't violate standard decency filters (language,

hate speech, disrespectful comments, etc.). If the blogger moderates to

adulterate the tone of the conversation, the blogger won't have much of an

audience very long. Move on.

As for blogs that don't allow comments? They aren't blogs. They're

publishing houses. Again, they won't have much of an audience very long in

this day and age if they don't open the dialogue. I'd move past them and not

worry with them, frankly.

By: faybiz

faybiz — Tue, 16 Nov 2010 02:57:57 +0000

What about blogs that moderate or DON'T allow comments?

By: Lucidprodigies

Lucidprodigies — Tue, 16 Nov 2010 02:23:39 +0000

I agree for the most part that an underlying one-sidedness difference exists however a more critical one is the control settings that enlist in an editing process prior to a release to safeguard the intent as opposed to a blog comment that is subject to critique and lower readership pulls due to an artificial support building formula.

Very interesting article that has helped me focus better on the little guys a/k/a bloggers!

By: clavoie

clavoie — Tue, 16 Nov 2010 01:48:00 +0000

Jason,
I think a more apt comparison would be bloggers vs editorial journalists. Ideally, a news journalist looks to report news as objectively as possible — hence the need to seek comments from 'both sides' of the story (discounting Fox News-type biased reporting). The editorial columnist is more like a blogger, because readers understand they're coming from a subjective stance. Blogging adds huge value to the editorial world, because it turns it from a soap box to a discussion. I still have great respect for many editorial journalists and love reading their viewpoints…but the blog commenting community really adds depth.

By: headlemur

headlemur — Mon, 15 Nov 2010 23:15:08 +0000

Jason,
Blogging is a tool for communication, Journalism is a career.
"True journalism — trained, ethical, balanced" is a noble goal, however, there are a couple of issues that are germane to today's traditional media landscape.

First is the bias of the editor, publisher, and or sales department as to what makes it into the 'news'. Second is the journalist's knowledge, experience, and whether or not they have any skin in the game. By this I mean having the society reporter do a piece on Credit Default Swaps is probably not the best way to get page views on a slow news day. Third is the 'news' concept itself. News is by it's nature unusual. You don't see headlines saying that 2 million people got up and went to work today.

Fairness? Blogging as a tool and arguably a vocation has grown to be what it is because of the un-fairness and bias of the traditional media's reportage and presentation, not just in subject, but in not revealing sources, providing backup information and last but not least, conversation.

Blogging and its commenting ability are much fairer than the 'Letter to the Editor' engagement of days past. Blogging is built for opinions although it can be used for other things. It gives folks the ability to speak out. This is supremely important because at the end of the day, whether it is a car or corn chips, it is a buyer and a seller. One to One.

As for your piece on your wife's experience, I would have named names. Simply because that is how I am and I have discovered over time that there are two customer service tracks.
Fix the Problem or Fix the Blame.

Your dealer decided to Fix the Blame. That they even paused in fixing the problem should have your head exploding. Especially under warranty.

This is also known as the Other Guy track. This is where you do the absolute minimum necessary and anything beyond the sale is the Other Guy's Problem.

Fix the Problem. This is the Next Guy track. This is where you fix the problem so the next guy has an easier time if another problem occurs.

Since you have posted this with the ethics and fairness tags I have a couple of questions.

Your reasoning on the publisher's selling advertising is a red herring. If the company is bad why would the publisher take their advertising dollars so that they could do this to someone else? I would think that the trust meter would rise at that point. Especially if they mentioned this?
You have already indicated had you named names, that the publisher was going to give the dealer the opportunity for rebuttal, so fairness is preserved, and the ethical obligation is fulfilled.

If the dealer has just Fixed the Problem, would you have written about it? Or would you have written something else?

By: Brannan Atkinson

Brannan Atkinson — Mon, 15 Nov 2010 21:44:47 +0000

I think readers have inherited more of the social responsibility — whether we wanted it or not. The audience has influence like never before.