I remember back in iBlog 3 when journalist Alecks Pabico mentioned “Sana wala na tayong away dun,” pertaining to the rift between mainstream journalism and blogging. It forced me to reassess my position on this whole citizen journalism issue. Prior to iBlog 3, I was a staunch advocate of Vincent Maher’s position on how blogging resides on a different plane of credibility compared to mainstream media.
Initially, I found the blogosphere just a tad too informal and unmediated for my taste. Eventually, I got to encounter many bright minds who openly voiced out their opinions on politics and society. If there’s one thing that the Filipino blogosphere has taught me, it’s that no one needs fancy academic degrees to churn out gems of thought. Now that the Filipino blogosphere has shown (in various cases) how the voices, varied as they are, create a very rich discourse, the impact of which on our lives, cannot be questioned. Take the golf mauling incident for example.
Now, I revisit the issue particularly because of mainstream media’s nitpicking on blogging as a source of news and a soapbox for opinion. Some mainstream media pundits have been critical on the role of blogging plays in the dissemination of information. Some criticisms even make one think whether MSM is feeling threatened at how blogs have become even beating them to the punch in reporting the golf mauling incident. The potshots have been consistent. That blogging lacks focus. That blogging is too unmediated to be credible. That citizen journalism isn’t journalism at all.
The problem that I find in the position is this – journalism anchors itself on the freedom of speech. Isn’t it quite ironic for institutions that operate on that principle to suddenly become an oppressive bloc? Blogging, as a technology, has enabled people to have their voices heard then why suppress it again. Anyone is entitled to have an opinion. So what if blogging does lack the guiding rule of the editor’s pen. I value momblogger‘s insight on how the discourse practice (production and consumption) is in a way a self-regulating peer review that replaces editorial influence and institutional advocacy.
Perhaps one angle of inquiry that has not been tossed into the discussion is this. How do we define “blogging”? If we dissect the word “journalism” as a morpheme, we get the stem “journal.” So it’s a bit ironic at how “blog” (coming from web log – an online journal) suddenly should be regarded as a totally different activity. But the semantic value of “journalism” does carry much more than just the simple idea of keeping a journal.
Again, my position on this has been fairly constant. The blog, for me, is the technology – a communications tool made possible by the Internet and the World Wide Web. Whatever a blogger does with the technology merits various approaches in analyzing each blog. Blogging is not an institution. It is but a technology. Ultimately, it is the blogger who decides what to do with them. If he or she garners an audience so be it. Much like how print media can be used for various reasons, whether it is for publishing a reputable journal of opinion or a showbiz chismis blog.
How about “mainstream” journalists (this, I use to refer to journalists who have been regularly published in print prior to blogs) and news organizations who happen to use the blog as their medium. Should they be relegated to that lower level of credibility? Has Ellen Tordesilias’ or MLQIII’s caliber diminished in anyway for having blogs? Though, I’m quite interested on how Carlos Conde would follow up on his insights on why blogging and journalism become a bad mix. Perhaps that should give us more thoughts on the question I used as this post’s title.
I do agree with Dean Jorge in him saying:
The bottom line is this. There are good bloggers and there are bad bloggers, just as there are journalists of both tendencies. But there is no doubt that the two tribes do things very differently.
I guess that really is the bottom line.
Check out these other posts:
Hi Alex
This is a great post and very thought provoking. Often people talk about the neutrality of a blog as an authoring tool and I think there is a lot to discuss in that position. It is true that using a blog as a publishing medium offers less enforced rigor in terms of the process and, one would assume, the processes inside MSM are supposed to lessen the likelihood of inaccuracy, partisanship etc etc. Practically, both media have moments when there is brilliance and also sheer ineptitude.
On average though, the different processes that should ensure accountability make it harder for journalists to abuse their positions and harder for them to publish without thinking critically about their work. There is also the pressure brought about by bloggers hungry for an opportunity to point out inaccuracies. In this aspect, bloggers have brought an extra level of accountability to journalists and one would hope that the same pressure starts being applied in reverse.
One could see it as MSM driven by process and individuals driven by passion. In the bigger picture these two things are complimentary and the petty squabbles are just posturing.
Hi Vincent
Thanks for dropping by and sharing these ideas. Now I think a good route to take is to critically examine how these claims play out using empirical data.
Much has been said about media bias. But in what ways is MSM exactly biased compared to blogging? Different MSM institutions, I believe, operate in varying ways. Perhaps the socio-cultural and political practices of one particular country or region has got to do with a lot with how.
It is possible that blogging will be, in some instances, an emancipation of speech from the clutches of an oppressive institution such as a biased press.
alex, it’s actually the other way around. some bloggers, perhaps to inflate their sense of self-importance, have been bamboozling the mainstream press every chance they get, as if they are a better alternative to mainstream journalists.
i agree: blogging and journalism are complementary. as i pointed out in my follow-up post on blogging, they are two different animals.
cheers
Hi Caloy!
Thanks for posting the link to your update. Nice to see the discussion enriched by different perspectives.
Well, we have to admit that in some cases, bloggers have, in fact, generated much more meaningful commentaries than mainstream media. Great take on your personal account as both a journalist and a blogger.
But who does really decide on a writer’s ethos? The editor? The audience? The code?