[CanadianGigolo]

hey!

They're watchin every move us Aliens make! Now back to the topic....

Who cares , kick out Canada of the commonwealth..... good!

Time to form a Republic, and start acting like an Independant country... Sam

[Canadaka]

Hyack is correct, the official policy is no blogs in the CKA News System. If you want to dicuss a blog article, you are free to post it in the forums or on http://www.bloggingcanadians.ca/ if its Canadian political subject matter.

[Brenda]

Hyack wrote:

My concern is that when a journalist submits a story it has to go past an editor, whereas a blogger has no control over him and can post anything he cares to, whether it is true, or just his outlook on events.

Blogs are not news. End of story.

I'm glad we have you as editor, Hyack

This place would be a mess if it wasnt for you (and the other mods of course, but we are not talking about them now ).

[Mustang1]

OldChum wrote:

Somewhat true but some journalist are only one version of an event or story.

No, mostly true. Good journalists - the ones that are academically trained, educated and professional - present objective fact when presenting a story. "One version" means it wasn't good journalism.

Quote:

What makes them so much better then some blogger after all some the blogger, I read are very good and far more knowledgeable then the journalists .

What makes them better? For one thing - knowledge. Another is education. MOST bloggers are uniformed wannabes that submit non-cited prattle onto the web where like-minded intellectually insecure or thinkers simply gobble up the junk because either they don't know enough to question its particulars or it meets their agenda or worldview.

Some bloggers are indeed more knowledgeable than journalists, but how do you know this?

[N_Fiddledog]

Mustang1 wrote:

Depends who writes the Blog, but most are subjective prattle spit out by people who simply found a method to share their opinions. It certainly doesn't match up with real journalism.

That's so true, you know (although I disagree with you when you start talking about the objectivity of MSM), and often blogs are news aggregate collectors so the story actually is MSM like say...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/

With those ones though you could just click to the source, and post that.

However the better aggregates, combine collected news and in-house writing like say...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ on the Left. (Hey, I just clicked that one. Tiger Woods wife beat him up).

or

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/11/28/a ... rventions/ on the Right.

and the quality in both those cases is comparable to anything mainstream.

It's hard to ignore the blogs, because often they break news the MSM won't cover. For example, this guy...

http://biggovernment.com/

broke the ACORN-hooker story in the states. He's currently breaking another ACORN story where citizen journalists have discovered document dumps in ACORN's trash as they ready themselves for a visit from the attorney general.

I follow the global warming issue. In that area blogs are vastly superior to MSN. They are often put out by people with knowledge in the field...

From the pro-AGW side, this one...

http://www.realclimate.org/

has a list of editors who are all active in the field of climate science.

From the against AGW side this guy...

http://wattsupwiththat.com/

is a meteorologist, and his blog won best science blog last year.

So yeah, there's blogs, and there's blogs, and the best do exercise editorial control.

[Scape]

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/tiger_w ... rity/67747

Interesting that you posted TMZ and Huff P. Here is the national enquirer and they have gone live with the story on Tiger that he was cheating on his wife and she was the one who beat him not the car accident. Remember, NQ also broke the Edwards story as well and they were on the money with him too.

[N_Fiddledog]

Blogs usually come from a stilted POV. Is that a problem though, or a benefit?

In my opinion the only difference between blogs and MSM there is the bias is obvious, and unchallenged with blogs. However the educated blog reader can simply know what's where, and read both sides.

[N_Fiddledog]

Here's a section from an angry opinion piece on the Blogs Vs MSM argument.

Quote:

Gerson doesn’t seem to want to face this truth – I don’t mean the truth that Big Media’s dying, that’s undeniable — but the truth that the death of this profession was a suicide. Does Gerson’s waxing of the nostalgic here sound like the MSM we’ve all grown to know and loathe:

"I don’t believe that journalistic objectivity is a fraud. I was a journalist for a time, at a once-great, now-diminished newsmagazine. I’ve seen good men and women work according to a set of professional standards I respect — standards that serve the public. Professional journalism is not like the buggy-whip industry, outdated by economic progress, to be mourned but not missed. This profession has a social value that is currently not reflected in its market value."

What profession could he possibly be talking about? Certainly not the same profession who set out to destroy Clarence Thomas, circled the wagons to save President Clinton, summoned all their resources to lose the war in Iraq, told us more about the background of an unemployed plumber than our current President, dragged Sarah Palin’s family through the mud, and on this very day refuse to investigate three of the biggest stories of the year (if not the decade): ACORN, CzarGate and ClimateGate.

And yet in the face of all this, Gerson writes of we bloggers:

"And the whole system is based on a kind of intellectual theft. Internet aggregators (who link to news they don’t produce) and bloggers would have little to collect or comment upon without the costly enterprise of newsgathering and investigative reporting. The old-media dinosaurs remain the basis for the entire media food chain."

Foul on the play. That might have been true a few years ago, but since the whole of the MSM put their blinders on and jumped in the tank for President Bows-A –Lot, it’s been the MSM following the lead of the Internet and cable news. Time and again, like Sergeant “I know nothing!” Schultz, they’ve been caught off guard and found guilty of their own kind of “intellectual theft” as they grudgingly report on Dan Rather’s forged documents, Van Jones’ resignation, the Tea Party movement, and the latest ACORN developments.

The shift towards online investigative journalism has only begun and look at the impact already. And maybe, just maybe, had our ink-stained dinosaurs picked up on and owned these stories they might have, I don’t know, sold more ink?

Blaming the death of Big Media on cable news and the Internet is ridiculous. Blaming everyday Americans who have simply grown tired of paying for the privilege of being lied to is insulting.

When there was no competition, hiding behind objectivity while openly playing press agent for leftist causes and politicians was simply the whoring out of credibility. But now that alternatives exist it’s a kamikaze mission – a Big Media suicide.

May they rest in Hell.

It's from a blog, of course.