Bloggers and Election "News": Contributing to Democracy or Just Plain Annoying?

[fushigi]

Interesting article from Salon. The Politico's Ben Smith broke the John Edwards $400 haircut story. Jonathan Martin broke the story of Giuliani's contribution to Planned Parenthood. Matt Drudge broke the McCain "Bomb, Bomb, Iran" story. This list goes on.

The problem with these reports is that they're not fact-checked or attributed to a source like a major news network's releases would be. When mistakes happen--such as when Drudge announced that a bump on McCain's head was a symptom of cancer--bloggers aren't held to the same standards as real journalists, and therefore criticism is weak and easily forgotten. Their claims, on the other hand, aren't (Swift Boat Veterans? George Bush is a cocaine-snorting homosexual? Katie Couric didn't break these "stories"--bloggers did.)

So where do bloggers get their info? Anonymous "oppo dumps"--mostly stories leaked by rival campaigns. Such white papers get healthy skepticism and--if broken--source attribution from real news networks. But bloggers will post anything:

By contrast, some of the major papers continue to treat oppo dumps with healthy skepticism. Adam Nagourney, the New York Times' top political reporter on the 2008 campaign, says his employer still maintains relatively strict rules about disclosing opposition research when it is used in a story. "When you get information from a rival campaign," he said, "you are supposed to say you get it from a rival campaign."

Furthermore, these bloggers have become EXTREMELY influential, and have much more freedom to be partial to a particular party or candidate. Take Drudge for example. He's broken major stories meant to embarrass ALL the major Democratic candidates, and EVERY major Republican one, except for one: Mitt Romney. Why? He has a very strong relationship with Romney's PR teams and campaign committees.

So bloggers are annoying, rumor-spreading, talking point attack dogs fiercely loyal without an ounce of impartiality. No story is too sketchy, too libelous, or too biased to run. Yet all things considered, I still feel that they help support, rather than erode, democracy. We're better off with them that without them.

Nevertheless, I still wonder if they shouldn't face the same standards as mainstream journalists, and whether they shouldn't try to focus more on the actual issues than just trolling for tidbits that have little to do with the issues, but voters can easily remember / disseminate.



fushigi

[Osborn F Enready]

The internets form of free-press and grass roots activism is taking America by storm, mainly because major media agencies are FAILING at their job to provide political information without bias, and their bias only goes to two parties.

The major media has become "propaganda ministers" for their parent corporations and advertisers.

We no longer have a free press outside the internet, except for independent investigative journalists who don't usually make TV except on PBS.

[RickSp]

I think blogs serve several functions:

1. They allow the expression of personal, often highly partisan expression that would have a hard time finding a place in conventional media
2. They may not be "fact checked" by others but they are good as serving as free-lance fact-checkers for the mainstream media.
3. They are also great "bullshit" detectors. When Stephen Colbert was deemed a flop by the conventional media at the Corespondents Dinner, he was a huge in the blogosphere. Likewise after the mainstream commentators decalred Rudy a victor in his response to Ron Paul, the blogosphere came roaring back saying, not so fast, Paul was right.

They are also just great fun.

Here is the current posting on Wonkette:

Learn To Destroy Planets From Don Rumsfeld Himself!

Do you dream of spending hundreds of billions of other people’s money to fuck up entire regions of the Earth while killing hundreds of thousands of people? Is your idea of “progress” daily cargo planes filled with dead Americans? Wondering how to turn a moment of national tragedy into a six-year global bloodbath? Dreaming of doing exactly what Osama bin Ladens tells you to do? Well, pack your bags and order your textbooks, because Donald Rumsfeld is opening a foreign “policy” institute to edumacate the Rumsfelds of tomorrow!

[brien]

Adam Nagourney, the New York Times' top political reporter on the 2008 campaign, says his employer still maintains relatively strict rules about disclosing opposition research when it is used in a story. "When you get information from a rival campaign," he said, "you are supposed to say you get it from a rival campaign."

They should talk about journalistic intergrity when Jayson Blair, writer for the NYT, had to resign for fabricating stories?

the New York Times: Information from Answers.com

In 2003, the Times admitted that Jayson Blair, one of its reporters, had committed repeated journalistic fraud over a span of several years.[18] The general professionalism of the paper was questioned, though Blair immediately resigned following the incident. Questions of affirmative action in journalism were also raised,[19][20][21] since Blair is black. The paper's top two editors – Howell Raines, the executive editor, and Gerald M. Boyd, managing editor – resigned their posts following the incident.[6

]

Nevertheless, I still wonder if they shouldn't face the same standards as mainstream journalists

The bloggers are held to standards.

Washington Post Blogger Quits After Plagiarism Accusations - New York Times

Washington Post Blogger Quits After Plagiarism Accusations

By JULIE BOSMAN Published: March 25, 2006 A 24-year-old blogger for The Washington Post, Ben Domenech, resigned yesterday after being confronted with evidence that he had plagiarized articles in other publications. His resignation came after writing six blog items in the three days he worked for Red America, a blog that The Post created to offer a conservative viewpoint on its Web site

It seems the WP did its homework.

And here:

2nd Edwards Blogger Quits - The Caucus - Politics - New York Times Blog

That didn’t stop conservative bloggers from flogging the issue. And that didn’t stop bloggers on all sides from posturing on one side or the other. And it didn’t stop even our readers from objecting on one side or the other, sometimes to the point where we couldn’t publish their obscene remarks. The epilogue to this? I’m not sure. Some will indeed claim victory; some will counsel that political campaigns have to vet and vet and vet any staff; others will feel doomed in defeat of what was seen as an arm around new — especially rare female — voices in the blogosphere by politicians.

So it seems some bloggers keep each other in check, maybe even more so than the NY Times did its own writer, Jayson Blair.

[brien]

Os wrote:

The major media has become "propaganda ministers" for their parent corporations and advertisers.

Bingo. There isn't much more to say as to why we need the internet bloggers in today's world.

[Osborn F Enready]

I agree Brien.

[brien]

Perhaps some of these people could be the new and modern members of the new Committees of Correspondence?

For those who need some refreshment of them:

Committees of Correspondence

Here is an actual modern one.:Committees of Correspondence

Political tags - such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth - are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.

[fushigi]

Quote by: brien They should talk about journalistic intergrity when Jayson Blair, writer for the NYT, had to resign for fabricating stories? the New York Times: Information from Answers.com

*yawn* That was a practice that was CHANGED due to the scandal. Only proves my point that news media writers are held to much stricter standards than bloggers and therefore deliver more accurate information.

Quote by: brien The bloggers are held to standards. Washington Post Blogger Quits After Plagiarism Accusations - New York Times It seems the WP did its homework. And here: 2nd Edwards Blogger Quits - The Caucus - Politics - New York Times Blog

*yawn again* Did you happen to notice that the blogger was from the WASHINGTON POST?

*Dr. House ironic wince* What is that, like some new blog thingie or what?

[brien]

*yawn* That was a practice that was CHANGED due to the scandal. Only proves my point that news media writers are held to much stricter standards than bloggers and therefore deliver more accurate information

.

It may bore you but it tells me the NY Times got caught in publishing phony stories and and had to out their writer to stop the hemmorage in credibility. It tells me the NY Times is less than reliable sometimes for news.

Did you happen to notice that the blogger was from the WASHINGTON POST?

I pointed it out in my post. The WP blogger quit because he was caught plagarizing in the paper. This further indicts the journalistic" integrity of the major papers. The WP was asleep at the switch, as was the NY Times. The fact is, bloggers take on other bloggers on these type of exchanges, and it seems to me, this brings out the truth in matters.