Sunday, March 29th, 2009...9:00 pm
Are bloggers journalists? Part two
Well, I have some more short-takes for you — tidbits I found around the blogosphere:
Are bloggers journalists? Look to history. Boston University journalism professor Chris Daly writes that “bloggers stand squarely in a long-standing journalistic tradition. … Their roots go back to the authors of the often-anonymous writings that helped to found America itself by encouraging the rebellion against Britain.” So we today are at the beginning of a revolution in journalism. Isn’t that exciting? (Be sure to check out my post on whether blogging is journalism and the thoughtful comments, including one from Daly about this essay.)
Why you should hire a journalist: Jill Geisler, of the Poynter Institute, has what I think is a great blog post. It explains to hypothetical employers why journalists make good workers. She lists 10 characteristics that make journalists good hires for any job, including writing skills, ability to get answers quickly and speed at meeting deadlines.
My favorite takeaway: Journalists have “been trained that ‘If your mother says she loves you, check it out.’ Journalists know that asking why and why not, looking at multiple perspectives, digging beneath the surface, challenging conventional wisdom, discerning patterns, finding context and thinking about “what’s next” improves any story. Just as it improves job performance in most any field.” That describes most of the journalists I know — both laid off and still on the job.
Print your own newspaper: Martin Langeveld has a provocative post at the Nieman Journalism Lab. He explains that Océ, a Dutch firm, has unveiled a new digital web press that could print full-color individually customizable newspapers fast. The idea is readers would sign up for the news they want, and the newspaper would print and distribute the individual papers to the readers.
Essentially, the Web allows people to do that now, for free. They read the stories or blogs they like. But this idea would give readers insurance of sorts that they got all the stories on a particular topic of interest, and they wouldn’t have to surf for them.
Would it work? Langeveld points out it could pose problems with larger newspapers, although one of the commenters makes a cogent case for using these individual newspapers to support hyperlocal efforts. My take: Explore it; can’t hurt.
– Gina
Like what you’re reading, subscribe
Share on Facebook
I'm Gina Masullo Chen, a 20-year veteran newspaper journalist who is a Ph.D. candidate in mass communications. I want to see journalism survive. I believe news organizations need to embrace new media, change their thinking, improve their content and innovate. Read more about me 
7 Comments
March 29th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
A fabulous post by an incisive thinker who recognizes that a journalist’s value to others and other organizations goes far beyond a singular ability: that of reporting the day’s news. Journalists are probably the most fascinating group of creatures I know. And perhaps an 11th reason to hire a journalist; they are born with a question mark in their minds. They are curious. They want to know as much as they can. Each may have his or her own way of finding “the truth,” but we all bring breadth, and not only depth, to our work.
March 30th, 2009 at 10:56 am
Hi Gina,
I’m the commenter you mentioned. Thank you for “cogent case.”
I think journalists often overlook the fact that the physical paper is an information appliance that does not critically depend on stories to create a good customer experience.
I think it would help, if “readers” were replaced by”viewers” when thinking about news-on-paper. Very few people read most of the stories in printed newspaper. In fact, very few people make the time to read anything. In any case, the viewer-to-reader transition is very similar for the web and print.
The difference is based on the nature of the media. They search the web. They scan print.
If something catches their interest, they stop, read the subhead. If still interesting they read the lede. If still interesting, they read the next paragraph. It’s less trackable than the same activity on the web, but in it’s fundamentals, they are both a series of micro decisions in the form of “go or no-go.”
The magic moment is when a viewer stops making those micro decisions. Instead they are “carried along” by the story itself. It’s how I think about the “timeless” experience created by great stories.
The advantage of print is that the words and pictures are still there when the viewer next has time to engage. It also makes it much easier for non-path defined scans. Let’s say that the cost of engagement is measured by viewer attention given. In that sense, the cost of engagement with print is much lower than the cost of engagement with the web. It’s easier to scan then it is to search
The disadvantages of print have been well described in terms of money, collaboration and speed. If we get past the “baby and bath water” situation, it will be easier to use the advantages of both print and web, so that 1+1 can equal 3.
March 30th, 2009 at 11:44 pm
@Emily Sachar –
Really your reason to hire a journalist #11: “they are born with a question mark in their minds. They are curious.”
Very true of just about all the journalists I know. That’s a helpful characteristic in lots of areas.
Good point.
– Gina
March 30th, 2009 at 11:54 pm
@MichaelJ –
Good to see you here.
I like the way you explain the difference between scanning the paper — and its advantages — and surfing the Web — and its advantages.
I think some journalists forget that. They sort of assume that readers are digesting the whole newspaper, when plenty of research shows that readers seldom read jumps, often don’t go beyond the lede, frequently just read headlines on many stories.
Another benefit to me of the Web is we can find out exactly what people are reading (or at least opening on their browser) and how long they stay there. That seems a valuable way to help news organizations assess what readers want. It’s a way to tailor the news.
In print, there’s not as clear a way to assess when reader are “carried along” as you put it by a story. (Sure, readers may call or send letters to the editor, but it’s not as concrete or quantifiable as hundreds of comments, what those comments say or just hit or unique visitors to a story or post.)
– Gina
April 4th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
Are bloggers journalists? This is an interesting debate with no real answer. My experience of bloggers locally is that they carry an agenda bordering on the obsessive with politicians and local issues whereas national blogs looking at wider issues tend to provide a greater degree of balance making them more akin to journalists.
April 4th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
Bombastic,
Interesting explanation of local versus national bloggers. Does make sense because if you’re blogging on a specific local topic, you must really care about that in a way that could border on obsessive. Whereas the national reach could give more perpsective.
It’s a great idea for a researcher to test, I think. Thanks for adding it.
– Gina
February 24th, 2010 at 9:40 am
I want to know if bloggers are journalist? if you know the answer get back at me A.S.A.P
Leave a Reply