This war between “traditional media” and the blogosphere has become somewhat annoying. In way way of thinking, people are going to decide what they want to read and where they go for their information, this quibbling back and forth will only put people off… I love how Rosen words the issue at the end of his blog post/rant, “For people in the press, bloggers vs. journalists is an elaborate way of staying the same, of refusing to change, while permitting into the picture some of the stressful changes I have mentioned. A shorter way to say this is: it’s fucking neurotic.”
This is exactly how I view it, people are just so comfortable in the way things have always been that they are hesitant to make a move into how things will be or should be.
As Clay Shirky points out, the definitions of journalists and publishers are outdated, they no longer apply to all the different outpourings of information on the internet. Anyone can be a journalist if they can write a blog, post a photo, or Tweet current events. Or can they? What exactly do we see as journalism now?
When I think of a journalist, I have always imagined one of those 50’s, black and white, yankee accent lookin guys that most people equate with old fashioned P.I.’s. Now I have to think about every story that I run into online and whether or not it is trustworthy and interesting. Many are written by very intelligent, philosophical individuals- some others, not so much.
Now a reader needs to not only take in information but we have to develop a sense of critical analysis in case the story is not true or the facts are skewed. Since bloggers are not “professional journalists” in the sense that they are not being paid by an accredited source, readers need to read with that in mind. This is actually a positive evolution for the consumer, because far too often the public is lied to or just not informed of issues that the media did not or would not cover.