Why do you like or dislike blogs/bloggers?

Nope...remember that there are young people who might be reading this web site... :-X

 

Eye - When this is complete, can you please email me a copy of your findings? Just curious. Thanks.
thebiglead@gmail.com

 

1. Are you a beat writer, columnist, both, or other? if other, please indicate your role in sports journalism)
Not currently. I was a sportswriter for a while a few years ago, then switched to desk/design. I left the biz a little less than 2 years ago.

2. What is your definition of a journalist? How do you react to/define the term "Citizen Journalist"?
A journalist is someone who collects, analyzes, and reports information in an objective or fair manner. A journalist would do this for all issues that he/she is responsible for, not just for a few issues that they are passionate about. And an important point: Journalists operate in a setting where they are held accountable for the quality and fairness of their work (in most cases this equates to being hired to do the job, with the understanding that if you do poorly, you would be fired/not be commissioned for another freelance gig again).

The concept behind "citizen journalist" may have started out as a noble one, but I don't think the actual application lives up to the ideals of the theory. In practice, the term is used as a buzzword by corporate management to justify cutting staff and resources. It is also too often misused by amateurs to give themselves an air of importance, which is encouraged by the news sources that are looking for submissions from their audiences. For instance, CNN.com calls them "i-Reporters", which sound a whole lot more important and professional than "reader submissions". But the fact is that much of the submissions is amateurish. Some bloggers call themselves citizen journalists to lend legitimacy to their work, but often the work is a disgrace to the word "journalism".

3. What is your definition of a blog?
A Web site where an individual can publish any information he/she pleases, be it opinion, links, news, or basically anything else.

4. Do you have a blog on your employer's web site? If so, how is your blog different than other sports blogs?
No.

5. What do you see the difference between a newspaper column and a blog posting?
ACCOUNTABILITY. A newspaper column, even though it is opinion, is read by numerous individuals BEFORE it is published, providing layers of safeguard against misinformation or unfair reporting. Columnists are also held accountable by their newspapers. If they write poor/unfair columns, they risk being punished by their employers. A blog, however, is usually seen by only one set of eyes -- the writer's -- before it is published. And in the case of most blogs, there is no structure in place to hold the writer accountable, and thus no external pressure to be fair. The worst a blogger risks in posting a blatantly unfair or even inaccurate post is losing a couple readers who disagree with it. A newspaper columnist has much more to lose.


6. If a blog is written by former sportswriters, is your opinion about the blog different?
Somewhat. Knowing that they are former journalists, I would expect a degree of professionalism, fairness, and commitment to accuracy because those qualities are usually pounded into journalists. However, that doesn't mean a blogger can't have those qualities as well, or that there aren't bad journalists, or that former journalists aren't liable to leave those qualities behind when writing a blog. In the end, I would still judge the blog by its content when assessing its credibility.

7. What is your age range? 18-30, 31-40, 40-50, 50+
18-30

8. Do you feel professionally (or personally) threatened by sports blogs?
Well, since I'm no longer in the profession, no. And I don't think sports blogs would ultimately replace sports reporting by newspapers because most sports blogs fill a different niche and many generate their content based on traditional reporting done by reporters. But I am saddened that many readers lump newspaper stories in with blogs (and talk radio), dismissing all as "talking head" b.s. without discerning the significant differences among them.

9. Do you think bloggers should have the same legal protections as journalists? Why or why not?
Tough question. On one hand, if a blogger is doing quality investigative reporting, I'm tempted to say yes, so he/she can protect the sources. However, if you consider it in the greater context, giving bloggers the same legal protections would potentially allow irresponsible bloggers (and there a lot of them) to report lies as information from anonymous sources. And since most of them don't work within a system where they are held accountable, I can see the potential for a lot of problems. It's a case of a lot of rotten apples ruining it for the few good ones in the bushel.

9. Is what you do relevant in the Internet Age? (this one actually comes from a friend who is going to ask a restaurant critic this question over dinner tonight)
Absolutely, but not because of the journalist's noble commitment to the truth or anything like that. It's merely an issue of practicality. Professional news-gathering organizations cover a very wide scope of issues compared to a typical blog. Journalists have a responsibility to report on a wide range of topics, even ones that don't interest them. Bloggers don't have that responsibility, so they tend to only write about things that interest them. Even when bloggers do good reporting, chances are it's because it's an issue that they are passionate about or they have a particular axe to grind. As long as blogs exist primarily to serve their writers rather than their audience/community, there will never be enough blogs to cover the scope of topics that traditional news-gathering organizations cover. For instance, where else would you go for coverage of Podunk High's 1-15 girls' basketball team? Wait for someone to start a blog about it? Good luck with that.

10. If you could have a one on one session with your most liked/disliked blogger, what advice or critique would you give them (and feel free to name the blogs here)?
I don't have a most liked/disliked blogger, but the advice I'd give:
-- If you're going to put in the time and effort to maintain a blog, do it in a way that'd make you stand out a bit from the sea of garbage that's floating around in the blogosphere. Don't just use it as your personal rant space.
-- If you want to declare your blog as a journalistic venture, or claim to be a beacon of truth while badmouthing MSM, then actually practice the journalistic principles of accurate reporting and fairness rather than bending and twisting facts to support your own opinions and presenting them as truth. Just because "the MSM would never tell you this," it doesn't mean what you're presenting is the truth either. If you want to grind your ax on your blog, fine, just don't call it journalism.

11. Should bloggers be given press credentials for events, and if so under what circumstances/rules?
I don't have a problem with good, responsible bloggers getting press credentials, as long as they are held to the same standard of professionalism as traditional media members in terms of decorum at the events, such as no cheering in the pressbox. If you want to cheer, fine, go buy a ticket to a game and sit with the fans. Also, in deadline events such as postgame interviews, professional journalists should be given the chance to conduct their interviews before bloggers do.

 

Eye, I'm very interested to read what the responses are to question No. 6. I'm a sportswriter disguised as a business trade publication writer at the moment and always wondered how a blog would be received by someone trained as a journalist. I like the answers I see so far and it encourages me to make a commitment to writing a serious blog. I know credibility would be a big issue no matter what, but if a former sportswriter is using his old sources, contacts, etc., for information written on his blog, then I think credibility becomes less of an issue.

 

Putting aside the fact that you have two No. 9s, I find two of your questions disrespectful.

8. Do you feel professionally (or personally) threatened by sports blogs?
9. Is what you do relevant in the Internet Age?

There are plenty of bloggers I respect. Some offer funny and insightful commentary about the teams they are passionate about. Some do reporting and/or research on issues that are under reported in the traditional media.

But the ones who squawk that trained, paid professionals are irrelevant hacks who are fearful of their BLOG power are a bunch of jerkoffs.

 

Why are those questions disrespectful? I think they are legit. I'm sure there are some old-timers who might feel somewhat threatened in terms of not being relevant to a certain demographic of the population. Whether they care is another question.

 

How in the world can these be disrespectful? They are asking for your gut or thoughtful reaction! If you are offended, what can I say? And so I have two number 9's. That is a typo and not the end of the world is it?

 

There is an implication in the questions that traditional reporters are irrelevant and should feel threatened by bloggers. The tone is snide.
Save your pleas of innocence. You know you think BLOGS are making traditional reporters irrelevant. Just admit it. Be honest.
Your poll is passive-aggressive.

 

You could not be further off of the mark...

 

I really don't understand why BLOGS get all the attention when forums-- message boards-- whatever you want to call this place-- are clearly superior.

This is what should be attracting all the attention, because here we get traffic (hits), exchange of ideas from many voices, and rapidity of information flow.

Forums, baby, forums. Not blogs.

 

Because for a forum or message boards to really work, you have to have active audience participation. This board won't be much good if only one or two people posted. A blog acts more as a mouthpiece of the person who runs it, so there's content on it regardless of whether there is an audience. Besides, if you're looking for a personal mouthpiece, a blog works much better than a board since its content comes primarily from your own opinion, whereas a board's content comes from other people's opinions.