Journalism and a point of view
David Hoggard eloquently discusses the difference between a journalist and a citizen with a point of view. It couldn't have come at a better time for the News & Record's bloggers as we navigate writing with a variety of different voices.
As I've read blogs from the area, I've seen many references to and critiques of the News & Record. No surprise there. I'm well aware that we're the Goliath in battle with David. That role doesn't bother me. You should be able to judge the quality of a newspaper by reading it. When we screw up, we need to be held accountable.
I've been struck, though, by how misinformed many of the comments about us are. There's a difference between opinion stated as fact and fact. For instance, when I announced in the paper that we had started blogging, one writer said this: "There's no doubt the News & Record's blogs will need the corporate stamp of approval before they're posted." No elaboration or evidence given. I don't even know what "corporate stamp of approval" means. I do know that the corporate types have better things to do than edit all the posts.
We've been written about for years. I have no problem with being on the wrong side of opinions. Variety of thought is what makes the world interesting. (Well, one of the things.) In any case, we have thick skins.
One of the reasons I'm blogging is to explain our business. We should be transparent. I'm well aware that not all journalists or pundits follow the same rules we do, such as requiring sources to be named; requiring two sources for every story; using primary sources rather than secondary ones; and making sure you get comment from the "other side." Oddly, I have rarely been called by people writing about us for information or clarification. (Once, a few years ago, a writer for the Rhino called me to ask why we had done something, and, before I answered his question, I said, "I'm stunned that you would call to ask. You guys never do that." His response: "I'm new here." I answered his questions, but I haven't been called since.)
So here's my point: Have a question about why the paper did something? Feel free to e-mail me and I'll answer or will try to get the answer. From that, draw whatever opinion you like. I may well agree with you. And it may serve to inform your readers and ours.
Comments (3)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
Unless I'm mistaken, the "Goliath in battle with David" thing was tongue in cheek literal- at least that's how I took it. Cone may have taken it metaphorically. Either way...
In the blogoshere, you and I have equal voices, John. So far, I'm pretty sure I am kicking your *ss if readership is the yardstick. My guess is that yours is still quite low... but building fast, so allow me to gloat while I still can.
A blog's readership depends on exposure and you've potentially got me and the rest trumped in that department. My exposure and readership grows the old fashioned way... word of mouth, the kindness of hyperlinks, working the email list, etc. Yours gets a banner ad and heavy local blog mentions, which I suspect gets your blog read more than the ad on the N&R site. (Please send me pricing for one of them banner ad things.)
I have freedoms that you (N&R) don't have, nor do I want you to have. (All those bothersome rules about sources and such would make me think I need to get paid for my time) There is room, and need, for many different media, especially on the local level. Blogs are just another outlet of information and opinion. How the N&R blogs stack up over the long-haul will be interesting to observe as it develops.
All that being said... I so look forward to news coverage or an editorial opinion from you guys that I can take serious exception to. So please... screw up a little more often.
When that happens, it makes this David's day more fulfilling, and... my readership go up.
Posted on September 7, 2004 9:47 PM
I absolutely appreciate the variety of voices and different media out there. I don't consider this blog or the newspaper competing with any blog, really. We don't particularly enjoy reading a scoop on your site, but understand how that occurs and will follow it when it's something we want to tell our readers.
I'm with those who want more choices, more opinions and more discussions. That can only help us. (Us being the community.) So, keep doing what you're doing. I'm reading.
Posted on September 8, 2004 8:34 AM
Thanks, John... I will.
I was kidding about the readership competition, I NEVER check my hit counter (yeah, right David)
Traditionally, and definitely locally, weblogs have been more of a co-op than a competition.
I see no change in that on the horizon with the added voices - actually, as long as everyone behaves themselves, I see that cooperation expanding.
Civil and open discourse can only improve our lot.
Posted on September 8, 2004 9:41 AM