Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
The Media The Internet

Blogger Vs. Journalist — Access Denied 154

An anonymous reader writes "The Application Delivery Networking blog has an interesting take on bloggers vs. journalists. The post is a response to a complaint on Mark Evans' blog about why Nortel wouldn't give him access, despite the fact that he's the only blogger that focuses solely on Nortel. As a tech PR guy I can tell you that the article hits the nail right on the head about vendors' tenuous relationship with bloggers." Quoting: "You probably aren't aware of the hierarchy out there [in] the media community. Access to information from vendors is based on your status within the hierarchy. The information a member of the press gets from a vendor is different from what's given to an analyst and is different than what a blogger is going to receive. Bloggers... [can] be dangerous because they aren't bound by any rules. And that's what you're missing because you've not been a member of the press... And guess where bloggers fall [in the hierarchy]? Yup. Stand up straight, there, private!"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Blogger Vs. Journalist — Access Denied

Comments Filter:
  • Interesting take? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ChicoLance ( 318143 ) * <lance@orner.net> on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @11:22PM (#18511429)
    How is this an "interesting take" on bloggers vs press? Bloggers feel
    disrespected because they aren't treated as real members of the media,
    and the press feels like credentials shouldn't be handed out to
    anybody with a web site. What's new here?

    I'm not an analyst, but I play one on Slashdot.

        --Lance
    • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

      With 5 minutes gone and yours the only comment - I'd
      have to agree that "interesting" just isn't the right word.


      Inigo Montoya: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means"

    • by gbulmash ( 688770 ) <.moc.oohay. .ta. .suomaf_imes.> on Wednesday March 28, 2007 @02:53AM (#18512469) Homepage Journal
      It's interesting because the guy gets it. In the end, it's all about the relationships. In 1998, I was MPAA accredited and the newly-hired "Senior Editor" for the Internet Movie Database (imdb.com). That and $2.50 got me a latte when I started calling studio publicists.

      When it comes to getting access it's about 4 things:
      • The size of your audience
      • The composition of your audience
      • How well you write
      • How well you shmooze

      I don't care if you're the only blogger covering any topic. I don't care if you've got 10 times more comprehension of a topic than the guy who writes about it for a major paper. If you're not firing on all four of those cylinders, you're not getting access.

      The bloggers with big audiences, good writing, known style, and who make the rounds of the conferences... they get access. But they've earned it by playing the same game the old media guys have... writing well, building a reputation, and shmoozing contacts. Some old media players may still consider them bastard stepchildren of media, but the PR world understands online media a lot better now than it did in 1998.

      It's a four cylinder game... Audience Size, Audience Composition, Writing Quality, Shmoozing Skill. Fire on all four and you'll get what you need, blogger or "journalist".

      - Greg
      • Yup, you've hit the nail on the head although as I noted in another msg, observence of 'the rules' also goes a long way. Have the four you cite and then keep breaking NDAs or embargos and you won't be in the loop for long.
      • by abb3w ( 696381 )

        It's a four cylinder game... Audience Size, Audience Composition, Writing Quality, Shmoozing Skill. Fire on all four and you'll get what you need, blogger or "journalist".

        Three cylinders CAN be made to work, if they're mighty enough; eg., Gabe and Tycho [penny-arcade.com], who don't seem to do noticable schmoozing, chosing instead to rule by fear. Of course, you can only afford to rule by fear if you are the eight hundred pound gorilla for Audience Size, Audience Composition, and Writing Quality... or if you count "felony

  • Why should they? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Seumas ( 6865 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @11:29PM (#18511475)
    Look, I don't think that professional journalists are somehow better than the rest of the world or that their opinions matter more, but at the same time, just because you're some dick with a fucking wordpress or blogger.com site doesn't mean you're owed admission as press to anything anywhere. Get over your god damn self. You have a keyboard and an opinion not necessarily a degree and a practice sense of professionalism.

    There are two things I hate. Journalists who have huge egos and think they are superior and bloggers who think they are journalists or even superior to them. I have a video camera and an idea for a movie. That doesn't make me a fucking member of the Directors Guild.
    • Just like everyone else, the PR guys choose who they respond to. They know it is important to work with the real media and blow off bloggers etc..

      If you sell computer parts you suck up to Dell and blow off the Mom & Pop. If you write drivers for your hardware, you write em for XP and Vista and blow off Linux. Why the hell should someone with a blogging account get all uppity?

    • Re:Why should they? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Whiney Mac Fanboy ( 963289 ) * <whineymacfanboy@gmail.com> on Wednesday March 28, 2007 @01:09AM (#18512019) Homepage Journal
      ...and bloggers who think they are journalists or even superior to them.

      I don't agree. A journalist is anyone who is invloved in the gathering and dissemination of information about current events, trends, issues and people. (definition quoted from wikipedia [wikipedia.org]).

      I have a video camera and an idea for a movie. That doesn't make me a fucking member of the Directors Guild.

      The Director's Guild is a union. You can be a director without being a member (you can't work on DGA signatory films tho'). George Lucas, Quentin Tarantino, and Robert Rodriguez are all not members.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by saskboy ( 600063 )
      How your flamebait got moderated "insightful" is a travesty. But then again, Slashdot moderators may have mod points, but that doesn't make them qualified to operate a computer.

      Seriously though, there's a good chance you've never tried to use your video camera to shoot a movie. And there's a much better chance that those members of the Directors Guild started off with video cameras an a homemade effort. So if you want to piss on bloggers because they didn't go to school specifically for journalism, when the
    • by FFFish ( 7567 ) on Wednesday March 28, 2007 @01:25AM (#18512079) Homepage
      Damn straight.

      One's publisher is the measure by which one's worth is (partly) calculated.

      When your publisher is the same as, say, Judith Miller's (New York Times), you can probably feel safe assuming most people will take your requests for interviews and information seriously.

      When your publisher is same as, say, TimeCubeGuy (Internet), you can probably feel safe assuming most people will laugh at you.
    • by Asphalt ( 529464 )
      You have a keyboard and an opinion not necessarily a degree and a practice sense of professionalism.

      Nobody needs a degree to write.

      IMHO, "a degree" can completely kill creativity.

      I have a video camera and an idea for a movie. That doesn't make me a fucking member of the Directors Guild.

      Luckily, you don't need to be a member of the Director's Guild to make a good movie.

      It might even help not to be.

      Have you seen the shit that comes out of Hollywood?

      The guy who put Queen Latifah and Jimmy Fallon

  • by Jeffrey Baker ( 6191 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @11:30PM (#18511481)
    A man named Terry Shannon published a newsletter called Shannon Knows DEC (and later Compaq, and HPC after that) for many years before he died. Shannon fit the definition of blogger except for the fact that his newsletter predated blogs. Shannon relied on rumor and secret information from his contacts at DEC. His newsletter was seen as a valuable contribution by the DEC user community, and alternately as a nuisance and a useful side channel by management. I would wager that the difference between Shannon and the blogger of the current article is that Shannon tried harder and didn't expect anything for free. He cultivated his information sources over the course of decades and frequently in the face of open hostility from the companies in question. Perhaps the blogger in question needs to cease whining and simply find a better way to operate.
  • despite the fact that he's the only blogger that focuses solely on Nortel.
     
    While I suppose it could be true, but its like saying your the only one who does anything. Its a big world out there.
    • by mwvdlee ( 775178 )
      If I started to blog on the 73983rd to 73986th bytes of data in Windows swapfiles, would that mean Microsoft should give me access to any and all Windows-related conferences?
  • by pembo13 ( 770295 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @11:33PM (#18511503) Homepage
    At this point in time, I do not trust the average journalist any more than I trust the average blogger.
    • Too true. I get a 'ripped off' feeling when I read a blog by a writer for a reasonable or respected periodical only to find it little more than efforts of some vendor's shill.

      There are a lot of bloggers, and some of them are actually more interesting the the journalism version of the same information. They are pretty much the same thing to me, but I do know not to trust a blogger on anything important without checking the information elsewhere as well.
    • At this point in time, I trust the average blogger more than I do the average journalist.
      • by Nasarius ( 593729 ) on Wednesday March 28, 2007 @12:08AM (#18511669)
        Given the sheer quantity of idiot bloggers to drag the average down, I'm not sure I'd go that far. But it's certainly true that people like Glenn Greenwald [salon.com] have been doing vastly better journalism and analysis than 99% of the "professionals". As he says about the recent idiocy of Chris Matthews and friends:

        These are not journalists who want to uncover government corruption or act in an adversarial capacity to check government power. Rather, these are members of the royal court who are grateful to the King and his minions for granting them their status. What they want more than anything is to protect and preserve the system that has so rewarded them -- with status and money and fame and access and comfort. They're the ludicrous clowns who entertain the public by belittling any facts which demonstrate pervasive corruption and deceit at the highest levels of our government, and who completely degrade the public discourse with their petty, pompous, shallow, vapid chatter that transforms every important political matter into a stupid gossipy joke.
  • I bet he'd get a lot more respect if he either had a sizeable readership or had influential readers. I don't see any reason that a blogger cannot make a good reporter or get the respect such as it is that a reporter gets.
  • If this guy wants to attend Nortel's annual meeting, he should buy a share of their stock. If you have a significant holding, you have to disclose that when writing about the company.

    • If you have a significant holding, you have to disclose that when writing about the company.

      Unless you're a blogger. And therein lies the problem. Journalists have codes of conduct and ethics. If they fail to follow the rules and somebody finds out they get reprimanded, or access cut, or even fired. If a blogger doesn't play by the rules they can get access cut - which is only a problem to the good bloggers who have access to begin with. The advantage of being a journalist is that if you break the rul

  • by Anonymous Coward


    Thanks, Mark. Earlier this evening I was feeling bad over the fact that I have no life. But then I read your story.

    Now whenever I have that feeling, I can remember that there's someone in the world "blogging solely" about some damn corporation, in spite of the fact that said company doesn't consider him worth a response.

    So don't feel bad. Think of yourself as example therapy for your fellow losers.

  • band together (Score:3, Interesting)

    by TheSHAD0W ( 258774 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @11:49PM (#18511593) Homepage
    It might be worthwhile to have bloggers who write on similar topics band together into a "zine" (a "bzine"?). Readers who want specific types of news will gravitate towards these sources rather than having to hit several different pages, increasing the legitimacy of the combined sources. The sources could then self-impose professional journalistic behavior on its members; since the "bzines" would be providing significant amounts of traffic to the individual bloggers, being kicked off one would be a serious incentive towards following rules. Once this has gelled, companies would be more likely to provide information to associated bloggers.
  • by indraneil ( 1011639 ) on Tuesday March 27, 2007 @11:52PM (#18511603)
    I have been blogging for 5+ years and I can vouch for the fact that most companies cant understand blogging or other means of "citizen journalism".
    I actually find the job of a journalist very confusing. To me, it appears that they are supposed to
        1- be able to grasp when an event is newsworthy
        2- to report is accurately
        3- to comment on/critique it
        4- follow up later with more related news if any

    Point 2 is something that an observant person can do with reasonable accuracy (without needing a background). Everything else needs a significant understanding of the business at hand. You dont need to be a doc to be able to say that a road-accident is serious; but when you are reporting technical/business decisions of a company, there is no way, a reporter can do a good job of it, without having a significant grounding on the background.

    Most reporters dont, and that makes most news look like press releases of a company.
    This is where a good blogger can fill in the gap. At the end of the day, what should matter is whether the writing is relevant, insightful and accurate. Whether or not, the person is a professional journalist is irrelevant. Most companies however seem to prefer the safety of renowned newspaper against the uncertainity of an unknown blogger.

    I guess the bloggers need to shrug it off and move on with whatever they can find. As long as the articles are useful, the companies will begin to eventually take notice. I know, at least in my work, we keep a watch on what some specific people are writing about us.
    • by Nasarius ( 593729 ) on Wednesday March 28, 2007 @12:10AM (#18511689)

      Most reporters dont, and that makes most news look like press releases of a company.
      Congratulations, you've just discovered why most corporations and politicians love the current system. Of course they don't want people who can ask insightful, probing questions.
    • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Whether or not a blogger can fill this gap is irrelevant. What matters is professionalism, something bloggers are not held to and generally do not have. Journalists have rules to follow, especially if they expect to be able to hold their sources' confidence in court. Besides, if bloggers suddenly have the same rights and privileges as journalists, guess what... They're stuck with the same responsibilities as well, including what they can and cannot say in politics. See the news from a short while back a
      • "Journalists have rules to follow"

        Yeah, I can summarise the important ones like this:
        Be a good little bitch for the establishment, and maybe one day you will get to ask the people who sit in the biggest, warmest, most impressive chairs inane questions and think you are important.

        Can I get a link to the story you mention? I must have missed that one and cant form an opinion just yet.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      I actually find the job of a journalist very confusing. To me, it appears that they are supposed to

      5. Understand the law
      6. Understand what they can and can't print
      7. Follow rules - know that an NDA means NDA
      8. Respect sources
      9. Check facts
      10 Understand the difference between rumour and fact and report accordingly and responsability.

      Most reporters dont, and that makes most news look like press releases of a company.

      That is more a feature of American news reporting, especially magazines where they pr

  • by MoneyT ( 548795 ) on Wednesday March 28, 2007 @12:13AM (#18511701) Journal
    Why in the world would you want to be subject to all the rules and regulations about what you say and all the political and commercial preassure that comes from being part of the "media". Why the hell would anyone want to attach that stigma to themselves? For a backstage pass and the chance to go to jail to protect your source? There are bennefits to not being part of the media, embrace them. If you want to be a journalist, apply for a newspaper job.
    • "Why in the world would you want to be subject to all the rules and regulations about what you say ..."

      This is the 2nd or 3rd time I've seen this alluded to. I've never known any 'rules' or laws that limit what you can say in print/media. Where are you getting this from? Paid journalists are as free to say what they wish as a blogger, the pressure to mediate that comes from the publisher who often succumbs to pressure from the advertisers, but, theoretically there are no impositions on what speech can be

      • by MoneyT ( 548795 )
        The most obvious one that comes to mind are the rules regarding print and air time for political candidates. Remember that while any one journalist at a news paper may report only on candidate A, the paper as a whole must give equal print space to candidates B C and D. For bloggers this would mean that despite you personally despising a candidate, you must write about their positions in an equal manner to the writing you give your favorite candidate.

        There are more, but that's the most obvious and I'm in a h
        • "The most obvious one that comes to mind are the rules regarding print and air time for political candidates."

          I believe these are the rules the Kuchinich is trying to bring back? From what I can see...these rules only were from the FCC and applicable to broad casters...it appears along the lines of that ruling, that many exemptions were introduced, and finally about 1987, these requirements were dropped.

          I haven't seen in my short searches where this was ever required of print media.

          THIS [slate.com] seems to be on

  • by jfruhlinger ( 470035 ) on Wednesday March 28, 2007 @12:14AM (#18511705) Homepage
    Look, I have a blog, and I am pretty sick of people treating blogs, for good or for ill, as qualitatively different from other types of publications.

    If you were a blogger and spent as much time ass-kissing/finessing/building relationships with Nortel as the traditional press does, and had readership numbers in the demographics Nortel wanted to reach, you'd get that press pass.

    If you were a traditional publication and spent a lot of energy writing stuff that pissed Nortel off, you wouldn't get that press pass.

    The fact that a blog is involved has nothing to do with anything.
    • If you were a blogger and spent as much time ass-kissing/finessing/building relationships with Nortel as the traditional press does, and had readership numbers in the demographics Nortel wanted to reach, you'd get that press pass.

      Precisely. What's even more fun about this article is that by grousing about it and getting his complaints Slashdotted, he's pretty much given up any chance of EVER getting a press pass. Way to stick it to Nortel!
      • by mgblst ( 80109 )
        You rant makes no sense, unless you believe that somehow slashdot opinion governs Nortel press passes.

        The fact he got linked to slashdot, means that more people know about his blog, and he gets a bigger audience, maybe enough to get someone at Nortel to take notice.

        A lot more people at Nortel will now know about him, and might be willing to help him out.

        I don't think that Nortel would have a cry baby clause.
    • by pla ( 258480 )
      Look, I have a blog, and I am pretty sick of people treating blogs, for good or for ill, as qualitatively different from other types of publications.

      Except, your "publication" does differ radically from other forms of the press...

      Most notably, except for a niche readership, you have no reputation. Perhaps you personally run one of the most famous newsblogs in existance - I still don't recognize you. That puts you, in terms of journalistic credibility, a few notches below "National Enquirer". Nothing
    • In theory what you say is true. In reality, most bloggers wouldn't make it as journalists. Your blog, for instance, is probably much better-written than most blogs I've seen. It also revolves around talking about cartoon strips you recently saw in the paper.

      People don't expect journalists to be supermen, but there is a generally higher expectation of quality and research. My brother is a journalist, there's a process of requiring a relevant educational background to get the job, of researching what wo

      • But there's nothing intrinsic to the blog form preventing a blogger from having the relevant educational background to get the job, of researching what would be an interesting story, of researching the story, of the story being edited by a professional, and of screening out the stories that don't belong. I certainly wouldn't claim my blog does that, but there's nothing stopping blogs from doing it.
        • Nothing except that a person with those qualifications would be snapped up by more traditional press, in exchange for more regular income and wider readership.

          For the same reason that there's nothing preventing great ballplayers from playing for minor league teams.
  • Not exactly (Score:2, Informative)

    by bjsvec ( 19546 )

    ..despite the fact that he's the only blogger that focuses solely on Nortel..
    Really? What about http://blogs.nortel.com/ [nortel.com]?
  • Bend over there, private!
  • That question seems to have a lot of bearing on how much or how little bloggers should be given access. Any idiot with a computer can start a blog; access to PR & real people's time should be limited to those who actually provide news coverage. The line is drawn somewhere with regard to print media; shouldn't the principle behind that delimitation apply to bloggers as well, whatever it might be?
  • I sort of follow the point that the article makes, and I agree at least that there probably shouldn't be an expectation of immediate media access from bloggers. But, and I may be confused here, I don't understand his notion of being 'bound by rules'. Surely the only rules that really stand against a free press are laws (libel/slander etc.), sure the company might say 'if you print this then we'll stop giving you information', that isn't really a rule, and could just as easily apply to information supplied f
    • The agreement (albient not spoken) of good behaviour is not with the individual journalist but with the newspaper itself. If a journalist (TV, print,...) behaves in a way that annoys new sources, the producer/editor will fire/repremand the individual journalist. Just read http://www.doublestandards.org/rothschild1.html [doublestandards.org] or google for "journalist fired". The editors do this because if they let it slide, their paper will be debnied sources that cost them scoops. The relationships that the papers build is valua
  • You're not liked (Score:3, Insightful)

    by syousef ( 465911 ) on Wednesday March 28, 2007 @12:52AM (#18511897) Journal
    It has nothing to do with your creditentials blogger or journo. D'ya think every journalist gets a ticket into every event? Who the bouncer's told to let it depends on the business interests of the party holding the event. If they like you and think you'll help them sell product/service you're in. If they don't you're out. Blogger vs. journo is just an excuse. Nothing to do with rights online or anything else.

    • D'ya think every journalist gets a ticket into every event?

      Indeed. Here in the UK the vast majority of IT hacks got completely bypassed by Microsoft when it came to review cpies of Vista and Office 2007. This time around Microsoft seemed far more keen on courting the daily newspapers and lifestyle mags, possibly for an easier ride. Indeed, one (IT) editor I know was told point blank by MS PR 'Why should we bother sending you a copy of Vista? You're going to get it one way or another'.
      Even more maddeningly

  • by kinglink ( 195330 ) on Wednesday March 28, 2007 @01:03AM (#18511973)
    Ok want to become a journalist, create a site, and I don't mean a fucking blog, I mean an actual site like IGN, gamespot, Cnn, or what ever media site you want, then bitch when they don't invite you because you're site sucks.

    Most major media outlets aren't just cheesy crap boxes that people put up over night, they are hard work, if you honestly want to be a "journalist" apply to them or make your own and then build it up. Just realize it'll take a long time before you're counted as an actual journalist, and all that time you better be playing by the journalist rules (btw if you don't know those? too bad you're held to them).

    Kotaku is a decently well known blog, who had a recent run in with Sony, where Sony blackballed them, they printed a rumor and sony was pissed off, this illustrates a problem with bloggers, they are known as an unknown entity. In the end sony apologized and removed the blackball, but it's still an incident that illustrates exactly why bloggers aren't journalists and shouldn't be expected to be treated as journalists. They have their own rules, and they don't owe anything to anyone else. Sony told them not to post it but they had a factual rumor, and no reason not to print it.

    Kotaku for the most part gets a LOT of stuff that bloggers wouldn't normally. They get invites to major parties, free development hardware (to try out new demos), free games, information and so on. But notice all this free shit isn't because they are a blog. It's because they are moderately popular to the point that people read them enough where they can be considered a news source. The companies who are supporting them see them as worthy of their attention. Kotaku was fully in the right here.

    On the other hand I could make a site "loser news" and never get a 10th of what they get, why? because my news site wouldn't be considered "worthy".

    Simply put bloggers should be honored when they are invited or allowed into press releases because they are getting in on something that 10 years ago they probably wouldn't but on the other hand, they need to realize exactly what they are. And that's not "the press" they are some idiot on the internet with opinions that people read, so it's time for bloggers to stop expecting to be treated like the press.

    If they honestly want to get into press events then they should becoming "the press", but they still aren't entitled to this no matter what Mr. Evans thinks.

    Oh and before you try it, don't try "freedom of the press" you don't got it. you can use "right to free speech" but again... ehhh Mr. Evans won't learn, and the rest of you pretty much understand this.
    • by Teancum ( 67324 ) <robert_horning&netzero,net> on Wednesday March 28, 2007 @01:48AM (#18512179) Homepage Journal
      Are you trying to say that you are only a journalist if you have a formal license to be a journalist from the government, like a doctor or lawyer?

      There are perhaps some people who would suggest that this should happen (and some countries even have issued licenses for this kind of activity), but on a basic level that is huge interference on the part of governments. An alternate way to look at this is if the "journalist" has a degree in journalism (or a degree in anything) or not. There are plenty of very excellent journalists who get their job without going through the route of college graduate -> small market TV/radio/newspaper -> major media outlet journalist.

      Yes, that is the more typical behavior to be "accepted" within the community of other journalists, which is exactly what this article points out.

      There is nothing that is stopping somebody from getting a printing press and setting up their own "newspaper", just as you can do that with a website. The only difference is that setting up the newspapers costs quite a bit more money than the blogger website. In fact most blog sites don't even require you to know HTML any more. But in the case of somebody throwing some money together and creating a newspaper, radio or television station, all of these media outlets started somewhere. You or I can create something like this if we wanted, and give us some "legitimacy" in terms of being a journalist.

      CNN, to give a very good example, started when Bill Tish used to stand in an alleyway behind the transmitter at WTBS with a paper bag over his head reading some AP wire copy for ten minutes each day at 11:30 PM.... to meet the FCC "local programming" requirements that included news coverage. I would say that in spite of these roots, CNN certainly is near the top of the food chain in terms of credibility as a news source (taking discussions of political bias between CNN vs. Fox aside).

      What happens is that for anybody to be taken seriously as a journalist, you have to build a reputation. And if you "belong" to a certain organization (say a group called "The New York Times"), your efforts as a journalist also help to build the reputation of the group you work with as well. And some groups have been around for some time to have a reputation that perhaps is even undeserved because the "journalists" working for that group are in reality inferior to their predecessors who built that reputation in the first place, or that in time people forget the awful mistakes and only have nostalgia for reporters who were around over a hundred years ago.

      Getting back to CNN here again, they also went through some growing pains when they got started (trying to shed the image of the unknown reporter I mentioned above) and went through some hassles trying to get a White House press pass. The first several times they applied, they were turned down nearly repeatedly, even though they clearly were at least acting like a national news agency. It gets back to the reputation thing again, and I think having the Bush White House turn down CNN for credentials would be today laughable.

      That this one blogger is complaining that he didn't get credentials for something he thought was his area of expertise, he shouldn't be crying foul or "freedom of speech". He is standing in the proud tradition of other journalists who have been kicked out of similar events. It is up to that blogger to demonstrate the reputation that he has credibility necessary to be considered in the majors. Just ask Matt Drudge. He is a blogger that would rarely get thrown out of a Washington D.C. press conference any more, and it took him some time to build that reputation.
      • Are you trying to say that you are only a journalist if you have a formal license to be a journalist from the government, like a doctor or lawyer?


        No, he is saying if one wants to be a journalist, one needs to follow the rules of journalism, act like a journalist, and earn the respect of other people as a journalist. Having a blog does not make one a journalist and does not entitle one to anything.
  • naturally (Score:4, Insightful)

    by broothal ( 186066 ) <christian@fabel.dk> on Wednesday March 28, 2007 @01:49AM (#18512185) Homepage Journal
    It's all pretty obvious. Certain publishers can get press cards for their journalists. Why? Not because the journalists are better writers than "bloggers", but because they are consolidated into a company and must obey certain rules. This means that I know the information I give will be treated within the rules of the press.
  • Trust, anyone? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by melonman ( 608440 ) on Wednesday March 28, 2007 @03:09AM (#18512569) Journal

    From the little experience I've had with the media, any statement about trust that includes all journalists or all bloggers is likely to be meaningless. People trust people, not a job description. I'm sure that being a journalist is a plus, but individual outfits tend to build relationships with individual commentators, ie not everyone will speak to the same journalists.

    So I'd expect part of the equation for bloggers to be the extent to which they form a relationship with people in whatever company (or whatever) they want to cover. And, if the blogger has an "all companies are evil and only progress by being slammed on my blog" mentality, or a "I tell you everything the company doesn't want you to know" mentality, that won't be a plus in terms of trust. More generally, while companies know that journalists are in business to sell their media, they at least think they have a handle on the motivation of journalists, whereas the motivation of many bloggers must seem pretty mysterious.

    If bloggers want to maintain strict neutrality and be unaccountable for what they write, they should expect to be treated as outsiders. If they want to be treated as insiders, rules apply.

  • A few months back the "Newseum" [newseum.org] held a seminar on the relevance of blogging, and how it affected professional journalism. One guy stood up and berated Wikipedia for a half hour, stating he saw no value in any media that could so easily be altered by the average user.

    Bloggers have to keep in mind that professional journalism is a multi-billion dollar industry, with owners and investors willing to defend the status quo with the same aggression as big oil attacks global warming.

    Just ask yourself: why

  • If bloggers would actually practice journalism instead of spewing for vile propaganda maybe they would get treated like journalists.

    If one wallows in the mud with pigs, one should not complain about being treated like a pig.

    If one wallows around with people who put out "Bush is fsking Devil! The Iraq war is the same as the Nazis' war! Bush is a Nazi! All corporations are EVIL! We pwn your data! Companies charge too much for something I want for free! Libs are teh moonbats! Libs eat turds! The Dems are surre
  • Just FYI: Mark Evans has previously worked as a business/tech journalist for both The Globe and Mail and The National Post, the two national newspapers in Canada. He covered Nortel extensively for both papers, so it's not like he lacks history or credibility when it comes to the subject area. So what you have is a situation where he obviously had no problem getting press accreditation in either of his print jobs, but now that he's a full-time blogger he's being shut out. That's different from any random sel
  • I don't see why tech-pop-media so-called "journalists" should be given any credibility.

    Compare Pamala Jones at Groklaw.net to an obvious shill "journalist" like Rob Enderle.

    Is Cringely any different than a blogger? If so, how?

    To say that the tech-pop-media is influeneced by corporate money would be putting it very mildly. Remember all the tech-pop-media professional journalists gushing over scox's ludacris claims early on? Lyons, Didio, Enderle, etc - all of them swearing that scox had a slam-dunk case. Pam
  • I was a stock analyst, and even so I think I went to one annual meeting ever. They're scripted and pretty uninformative.
  • This is the rare post where flashing credentials is in order for context. I've been an analyst for a quarter-century. I've been blogging for a couple of years. I was a columnist for Computerworld for a few years, and when that gig went away moved to Network World. So I've seen things from all sides. Here's my take.

    1. Major press get attention. When I got active again as an analyst, I went out of my way to secure a press gig. Nothing gets a vendor's attention like hearing that a major publication wants

"I never let my schooling get in the way of my education." -- Mark Twain

Working...