Congeries of cross connected concepts
I was just thinking about
and I think what we may be seeing is the replacement for Old Media in terms of actual journalism. In this cases, Old Media not only didn’t report on the issues (the failure in the Van Jones case being “particularly massive’:http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/kausfiles/archive/2009/09/06/van-jones-does-the-nyt-know-what-a-truther-is.aspx) but almost all of the useful information was found or created by amateurs. I don’t see any reason to expect this to do anything other than become more so as the years roll by.
I would also point out one thing which I am sure will be missed by the “Old Media is indispensable” faction, which is that there is no need for any of these amateurs to ever do any journalism again. It is, in my view, very likely that they won’t. It will be other amateurs who do and that is a key unappreciated strength of this thing, that each story can be done not by someone who gets assigned to go through the motions, but by a small set of people passionate about that particular issue.
Won’t this kind of amateur hour lead to a generally increased skepticism of all such reports? Yes it will, and that is a good thing.
| erp Monday, 14 September 2009 at 09:47 |  |
A lot of people are already skeptical of the “Old Media.” I don’t believe anything in the media unless it’s independently confirmed by outlets I believe tell the truth. For instance, DC media low-balled estimates of protesters as 60-70,000 even though the US Park Service estimated 1.2 million. I don’t think the truth can be hidden as it has been in the past.
| Annoying Old Guy Monday, 14 September 2009 at 14:48 | |
On the other hand, without Old Media, who would do the critical stories like this — giggling teen age girls at a sleepover? I think not!
(via daddy at Just One Minute)
| Annoying Old Guy Friday, 18 September 2009 at 07:56 | |
Cite: 20 things that won’t get reported while the Democratic Party is dominant — a good list of reasons why Old Media not only fails to inform the public, but actually works to make them more ignorant. I can see why the MAL views that as essential, but not why the rest of us should.
Cite: Charles Gibson demonstrating what real on the job incompetence looks like
Cite: Hugh Hewitt on how the NY Times edits quotes to conceal politically incorrect information — yet again, trying to create a more ignorant public through disinformation.
Interesting conclusion to a post about a story the traditional media failed to cover: I would also point out one thing which I am sure will be missed by the "Old Media is indispensable" faction, which is that there is...
