blogging vs. journalism?
where does blogging start, where does journalism begin? or is it just two ways of looking at the same thing?
this is a matter we regularly discuss.
undoubtfully blogging becomes more and more important as a free (as in speech, as well as in beer) form of transporting news and opinion.
sad but true, this last week -and it’s terror attacks on London- again showed the potential of blogging as a serious source of news, pictures and reportage.
a potential also newspapers (and any other established kind of media) will have to respect. as I open my standard this morning, in order not to breakfast alone, I realise that they start doing so.
on the weekend-issue’s commentary page they quote some well known blogs (such as europhobia or talking points memo) on the topic.
I first read about the bombing on boingboing. they linked some London blogs, including our colleges at london metblogs, lots of flickr images and the like.
blogging is on the way to reestablish choice of news sources, an alternative to politically influenced (read: abused) mass media.
bloggers were the first to announce bush’s reelection, they tell you about all possible and impossible things you won’t read elsewhere from every imaginable point of view.
to close the circle I want to come back to the opening question.
in my personal opinion blogging and journalism are two very different things meant to coexist. journalism should be serious, well investigated, checked, double checked, spellchecked, authorised by independent editorial staff… not to speak of critical unbiased and well written.
blogging on the other hand is fast, it’s free and it’s fun. and it opens it’s readers a world of choice which of the above journalism-soul-be-list is important for them.
all in all it’s yours – the readers – decision: read it, or delete it.