What I learned courtesy of Jose Antonio Vargas of the Washington Post:
“The term ‘citizen journalist’ has an Orwellian ring to it,” says Andrew Keen, author of “The Cult of the Amateur,” who’s criticized the Web 2.0-Wikipedia world, where everyone can become their own editors.
“People are becoming Big Brother, either with a camcorder or a keyboard, and following the candidates around. It’s ridiculous. You can’t just be a great journalist, the same way you can’t be a great chef or a great soccer player.”
Journalists, he continues, “follow a set of standards, a code of ethics. Objectivity rules. That’s not the case with citizen journalists. Anything goes in that world.”
And now I apply my newfound knowledge to the world at large.
Joe Klein is not a real journalist, after not one, not two, not three, but four articles or posts about how folks are wrong to oppose the latest potential FISA monstrosity he adds at the end of the last:
I have neither the time nor legal background to figure out who’s right…
Somebody get Joe some Cheetos and add him to Memeorandum.
(photo from Idanderson)
Related posts:
- The White House, The Gays, and Lessons to Learn
- This Dumb’s for You: What We Will and Won’t Learn from the Obama-Gates “Teachable Moment”
- Donna Edwards (and others) could learn a thing or two from Jerry Nadler
- Ambinder: Sorry I Was So Stupid, But I Was Right to Be Stupid
- Village Surprised by Support for Public Option
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
i can’t be first. can i?
Good morning, Attaturk! Joe Cline has something up his sleeve though, doesn’t he?
Joe Klein doesn’t have the time to be a journalist? Fancy that!
guess i can.
“You can’t just be a great journalist, the same way you can’t be a great chef or a great soccer player.”
While being a great soccer player may require special strength, stamina, and skills,, ANYONE can cook. And ANYONE can be a journalist, if the numerous community papers staffed by volunteers in Philadelphia are any indication.
For that matter, many of the reporters at our local public radio affiliate, WHYY, began as volunteers with no experience. I know for a fact, because I volunteered there and a number of my friends stayed on and became full-time employees.
NONE have J-school degrees. Vargas needs to stop being an elitist.
i don’t buy keen’s contention. anyone with a high commitment to intellectual honesty can be a journalist — even if they have a particular perspective.
it’s the dishonest, slothful and incompetent who cannot be journalists. like, say, joe klein.
Good Morning Attaturk!
Time and Klein are beneath contempt.
.
(love the kitty, someday I’m gonna have to try that stuff …heh)
Here’s quick background on the Joe Klein dustup. Over the past week, Glenn Greenwald has had at least four articles on the matter, each fiercer than the previous one. Great fun!
Is that so? In that case, the MSM has what? About 4, maybe 5 journalist working for it?
Bilbo @ 9
isn’t that number a little high?
A real Rovian turnaround. Last I heard, Big Brother was a dictator at the top, not bubbling up from below. Tsk, tsk.
Also, I think by now we should confine the term
to the lexicon of oxymorons.
I had an epiphane downstairs and while it’s not exactly on topic it sort of is in the obscure, it’s such a good idea I don’t want it to get lost in the epu
By way of Atrios:
Another reason to love DiFi and her hubby.
(Read the first note at the bottom.)
Better still, snowflakes. That way every fertile R woman can be required to take fertility drugs, have her eggs harvested, fertilized & placed in the cryostat. Donations galore.
Good morning perris,
what! no more epiphame’s?
Elliott @ 15
hehe
at work, no time to html
thanx for noticing though
g’morning to you too!
Elliott @ 15
which reminds me of the greek tailor who warned his son, euripedes pants, you don’t get another set.
I don’t care for the term “citizen journalist” — I find it demeaning and belittling, myself.
But when it comes to the digging up of buried information, the parsing of statements, the explanation of various forms of professional jargon, and the calling of “bullsh*t” on those trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the public . . . it’s an easy choice.
I’ll take Looseheadprop, Christy, Jane, emptywheel, digby, scarecrow, the crowd at TPM, Angry Black Bitch, and others in the blogosphere over Judy Miller, Steno Sue, Howie Kurtz, and a lot of the Professional Journalists with their noses out of joint.
The Libby Trial opened the eyes of those in the MSM to what blog-based reporters and analysts can do — and can do better than they can, in some ways.
Right. Just look at what happened when a 19-year-old kid tried to write his own operating system: http://linux.slashdot.org/linu…..0224.shtml
‘morning, all… coffee is ready – hold out your cups…
flipped on Morning Joe and boy, they are seizing the wacky Zogby poll as proof (PROOF!) Obama is the only viable candidate…
this is really ot, but i’ll introduce it by saying that amy goodman continues to be my favorite journalist in any medium… and that’s a pretty high bar when the competition includes the likes of glenn greenwald and sy hersh.
since vargas has brought up orwell (via keen), i’ll let orwell speak for himself (instead of keen’s twisting of his meaning):
to counter the propaganda generating machine, commonly referred to as the “annapolis peace conference” i recommend this morning’s excellent democracy now! amy goodman has long segements of noam chomsky and desmond tutu recently in boston on the current I/P situation.
a most excellent and necessary corrective to the lies of our days.
at 9am it will repeat on wbai ( wbai webstreaming here) and other stations throughout the day. later in the day the program will be available via podcasting, and webstreaming in the archives (here).
strongly recommended.
eCAHNomics @ 11
It takes a “great journalist” to screw up a metaphor like that. ;-)
allan_in_upstate @ 13
well, just fuck ducks. what a thing to wake up to…literally and figuratively.
and to Peterr@18: amen to that! I’ve been addicted to same list since the Libby liveblog and relished every minute.
Gotta do something about it though, every day.
i object to the concept that journalists are a subset of people – journalism is something people can do – no something people are.
Peterr @ 18
I’ll tell you what’s debased;
“homeland”
what the FRIG is up with them?
and why the FRIG are democrats allowing them to use this nazi term?
I have family that that was affected by nazi germany and I am profoundly disgusted we are using this term ANYWHERE
OldCoastie @ 20
Here’s cinnamonape with a great explanation on the topic from the last thread
“Journalists” are really threatened. They’re being intimidated from the top (W & corp masters) & challenged from the bottom (blogs). I guess you can expect them to be somewhat testy.
selise @ 24
The distinction per Andrew Keen is that:
And that claim is absolutely silly. If we look that “professionals,” they’re constantly making shit up and misdirecting public attention to the frivolous, e.g. candidates’ wardrobes and haircut budgets.
Attaturk, I love your FDL bio. Glad you caught that slip-up, though, or else the Professional Journalists would be all over it.
(Professional Journalists . . . let’s just call them PJs for short.)
I agree with Selise about Amy. I have been listening to her from her first days on WBAI. She’s the real deal.
The professional journalist is a creation of the MSM and corporatization of the media and the bobble head show which created the need for high paid, well connected “insiders” to opine. What an awful development!!!!!! This quickly turned into a means to spew propaganda and flack into the mind of the public.
At this point I don’t believe anyone in the MSM especially when they are making oddles of money, because then they are representing their class and their views are filtered from this perspective.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Witness the MSM. Case closed.
Money and the pursuit of wealth ruined everything.
Purchase a clue, journalists.
You’re obsolete.
just a reminder – democracy now! starting on wbai.
see my comment @ 21 for recommendation to listen to democracy now! today – first part is noam chomsky with an excellent summary of current I/P situation and second part is desmond tutu giving inspiration and hope. not to be missed.
I will probably take some heat for saying this but please hear me out (as best one can in such a brief comment): standards and a code of ethics are fine things. Citizen journalists should talk about such things. However, the source here (Keen) and other professional journalists who critcize blogs, wikipedia etc don’t seem to follow their own standards or ethical codes. And, for those that do, they are completely caught in the GOP media/entertainment system that makes reporting a joke. Mainstream journalists lack credibility on so many levels that one cannot take their critiques of the rest of us seriously.
biff diggerence @ 31
well obsolete isn’t quite the word, now instead of the fourth estate for democracy they are corporate owned and run tools for neo cons and fascists
The problem with most of the “professional” journalists in this day and age is that they made the fatal blunder of actually befriending their subjects.
When you become friends with your sources and subjects, you become vulnerable and you go into their pocket, and you print anything they say because your friend couldn’t possibly steer you wrong.
To quote Phillip Seymour Hoffman in Almost Famous: “If you want to be a true friend to them, be honest and unmerciful.”
Peterr @ 29
Too confusing. Bloggers are the ones with the pj’s.
William Hathaway on WJ on return of Sharif to Pakistan: the entry of another joker into a pack already loaded with them.
SanderO @ 30
also complicit was the “industry” of academia, which over the course of say 25 years has made a graduate degree in journalism a credential that pretty much all the major media companies expect to see from their applicants, if not out and out require.
the great good thing about journalism has always been that ANYONE was welcome as long as they could do the job. that’s what made newsrooms so flippin cool — you never knew where the reporters were from, what backgrounds they had.
this homogenization by (graduate) degree has guaranteed a generation of reporters who have ingested the false beliefs of objectivity and he said she said “fairness.”
I think it was Greenwald that put Klein on the defensive enought to say the offending quote…
I have neither the time nor legal background to figure out who’s right…
But Klein did have enought time to publish a picture of all the Dem candidates at a debate and proceed to say how bad Dem’s are on national defense. He just can’t be bothered with the little things like facts, those are too hard.
Kind of like the run up to the war, how could anybody have known that Saddam didn’t have nukes, wasn’t behind 9/11, etc. It was too up the air. Right?
egregious @ 36
Silly me I always thought that bloggers were naked
Suburban Girl @ 33
nicely put
Joe K. is saying that no mortal has the time or talent to figure out what it all means: neither Joe, nor any Congress Critter, nor any citizen reader or journalist. Certainly no professional blogger, like Michelle Malkin, would understand it, nor amateur bloggers like Glenn Greenwald or his readers.
Who can meet their deadlines if they actually do their own reading and research? We should trust the GOP version of what the FISA legislation means. After all, someone on the GOP team wrote that legislation; they must be brilliant enough to understand their own work. They would never lie to me, says Joe, so you can rest assured they would never lie to you. Since Joe’s usually Right, even when wrong (like the Prezelnit), what’s the beef?
That reasoning is why Joe’s an idiot, an exorbitantly overpaid one. But then, the king’s jesters are essential when the king’s a fool, the black prince puts to the rack any nobles who admit it and runs the peasants off the manor if they point it out.
To quote another “journalist:” You’re only as good as your sources.
If she really believed that, dontcha think she’d dig a little for good sources?
dmg @ 38
exactly!
I think the same thing can be said about MBA programs
journalists today all are wannabe pundits
eCAHNomics @ 43
which is why the beltway is poison for serious journalism. anyone who has spent a weekend there knows it’s the most perversely small-minded company town on the planet.
And thinking back, the irony of Woodward and Bernstein
katherine Graham Cracker @ 45
I disagree. There are some people doing some magnificent reporting. Charlie Savage is an excellent example. The columnists, however, like Joe Klein, and Kristol and Krauthammer are the ones who want to be pundits when in fact they couldn’t find their ass with a flashlight and a map.
Joe Klien is a zionist.
I don’t know if this is posted yet but this made me laugh out loud over at swampland;
He’s changed it again! It’s now
“I have neither the time nor legal background to figure out who’s right (ADD: about this minor detail of a bill that will never find its way out of the Congress).”
Well, if it was such a minor detail about a bill that will never be passed, why write a column about it in the first place?
What’s funny is the people who are most likely to worship Ayn Rand look most closely like the bad characters in her books.
The little cabal of serious types….
wigwam @ 19
And precisely how does he think chefs and soccer players become great? True, there is a certain amount of native talent that might get you as far as a job as the local 4th of July BBQ cook, or Adult league Soccer. But “great soccer players” spend years training, playing on lower level teams acquiring team skills, etc. A chef will almost always attend a culinary school, train under other great cooks, and learn a ton of skills, recipes, and management techniques.
I think this says more about the LACK of journalism skills of Keen, and by extrapolation, Vargas. Did they actually ask chefs and footballers about what it takes to be GREAT? Seems that they simply pulled these two professions out of their ass due to their unfamiliarity with the general pubic.
Imagine if they had said something like “You can’t just be a great journalist, the same way you can’t be a great engineer or a great NFL Quarterback.” People woukld scoff!
No…I guess being a “great journalist” apparently requires using examples that people would not be aware of, and not fact checking with those that actually know something about those professions. Being a great journalist, like the Pulitzer prize winning Judy Miller, means acting as a propaganda shill for the Administration and not investigating the reliability of “informants” like “Curveball”.
Being a great journalist, like Robert Novak, means that one can take third hand information from an original source one doesn’t even know the name of (a supposed Clinton staffer), and then conceal that one got that from a SINGLE unnamed second source. Lemme see, just how many standards of responsible ethical journalism does THAT violate.
So lemme see, at least hauling a videocam around gets candidates saying real things, on tape. It will demonstrate when they are hypocrites, or show aspects of their persona that the public aren’t aware of. Sure, some candidates can be hounded to the point of irritation, or make an occasional slip. Only those who have already made their judgments will not give people a second chance. But if there is a pattern then it’s good to have people out bird-dogging.
And rather than “citizen journalists” lacking editors, the better ones have hundreds of fact checkers. The ones that shut down their fact-checkers are obvious. One can see if they ban contrary views on their comments section quite easily. One can simply send in a contrarian comment or fact and see what happens.
The better “citizen journalists” will themselves double and triple check facts, and if they don’t other bloggers will publicize just what schmucks they are. T-Rex was famous for tearing apart right-wing “Citizen journalists” like Malkin, Althouse, and “Atlas Juggs” for their nonsensical, inane, erroneous, or egomaniacal postings. And no place is so critical of those who call themselves “journalists” than “citizen journalists” like FDL.
FDL and other on-line sources represent the Revolutionary broadsheets of our time. the MSM are the establishment newspapers back in London spouting the King’s position without an ounce of critical thinking.
selise @ 24
It was a job long before it was a ‘profession’ — now more like the world’s oldest profession than ever…
you known what’s the best part of this joke line commentary over at swampland?
it has served notice to other journalists that they will be verbally brutalized if they are not factual
or they will shut their comments off, one or the other
“The columnists, however, like Joe Klein, and Kristol and Krauthammer are the ones who want to be pundits when in fact they couldn’t find their ass with a flashlight and a map.”
well, I agree….but what is required to be a “real” pundit, besides the ability to locate one’s own ass? For that matter, what does it mean to be a “journalist”? I think that before anyone, including we in the blogosphere, talk about who performs X or Y task right or wrong, better or not at all……there should be some definition of exactly what proper journalism or punditry entails. Not sure I know, but in my opinion “calling bullshit” isn’t enough.
I’ve spent the past few days nosing around in the ongoing dispute about what the House FISA Reform bill (The Restore America Act) actually says.
That’s how Joe leads off his latest.
Now what’s both funny and typical about this is his “ongoing dispute” makes it sound like it’s something that is in the rarified Beltway air, with political theologians performing complex exegesis on a pronouncement from above.
In fact, he’s talking about the language in a pending bill, language that can be changed if it isn’t clear. Originally, he said, in the print edition of Time with its 4 million subscribers:
(my bolding)
Now this is absolutely ridiculous. The bill doesn’t say that, nobody intended that, and there is no chance that it would be interpreted that way by intelligence agency or judge.
So the “dispute” is over whether Joe’s regurgitating a key republican talking point has an relationship to reality.
So he’s now taking the position that it is too hard and complicated for a poor soul like him to work out, although, as Markos pointed out yesterday, his whole job with Time is one column a week.
Instead of a simple retraction–”I got played by a republican operative”–he keeps trying to find some way to retain some claim on not having simply blown the central part of his thesis.
It’s really rather sad. And now Glenn is in touch with his editor, to figure out how this could come to be.
nomolos @ 40
Maybe some bloggers are, but Christy said otherwise: “You really haven’t blogged until you’ve written a post while wearing a tiara and a feather boa. It’s ‘extreme blogging,’ and don’t let anyone tell you differently.”
There are many good journalists with very little difference, depending on what they are doing. To name some of the best known news gatherers in no particular order, we have Amy Goodman, Greg Palast, Jeremy Scahill, and Sy Hersch. You can add others as needed. For news commentators we have the posters here at FDL (headed by Jane and Christy), Bob Somerby, Keith Olberman, the posters at MediaMatters (Alterman, Boehlert, Foser, etc) and Glenn Greenwald. Again, add as needed. Then there are some that seem to be in between,such as Emptywheel, Taylor Marsh, and Paul Krugman. Of course, this list is certainly not exhaustive. Any of you may correct my view as needed.
Peterr @ 58
That is my favorite blog post ever.
Suburban Girl @ 33
i think you’re right when you say we should be talking about standards of conduct – but i think we already do that every day in our critique of the corporate msm. when greenwald tears klein’s “reporting” apart, he is, i think, accepting that there is (or ought to be) a standard for reporting – no matter who is doing it.
the standards are, i think:
we should not take “information” from anonymous sources (especially sources who compromised by a conflict of interest) and pass it on or use it to construct a narrative without either verifying the info (klein could have read the damn bill, or he could have checked with lawyers who don’t have an axe to grind) or without telling the audience that the source is compromised by a possible conflict of interest and that we haven’t checked it out.
but we’re all human and will slip up from time to time… so i think the biggest rule of all ought to be that when a reader points out to us that we screwed up and violated our own rules or got something wrong – we have a responsibility to respond thoughtfully (which means engaging with the criticism in an intellectually honest way) and and not defensively and dishonestly as klein did.
i think these rules apply to everyone – from klein to amy goodman to the lowliest commentator here – everyone who is purporting to report information of interest to the reader.
jayackroyd @ 56
you know, someone should make this suggestion to him over in his comments section because he can actually reclaim some integrity if he does that
that’s a nice suggestion…go and suggest
perris @ 50
i’d even settle for a bit of emily litella from jokeline.
“never mind.”
but it’s not gonna happen.
let’s not forget, this is a guy who lied to his own employers and colleagus about being the author of “primary colors.” a man that at ease with deceit by definition cannot be relied upon.
Elliott @ 26
You may not believe this…but I first heard about this poll from a SINGAPORE radio station! It was a headline news story on their little 5-storys in 3 minutes evening newscast. Guess who owns that station? Newscorp…i.e. Rupert Murdoch!
I was aware of Zogby’s On Line interactive from my previous experience with double registering. I actually did that unintentionally, having forgotten my log-in ID. So I registered again. But then I recalled my old ID.
The thing is they will send you two surveys for the same poll if you have registered twice under different names, phone numbers, and emails.
Given that Zogby’s is likely to be a site that is of interest to campaigns, political pundits, and political junkies…and not really the general public one would expect registrants to already have “strong attitudes” about political issues. As well many will be sphisticated in the art of using such easily manipulated surveys t the benefit of their campaigns.
JUST WHO MIGHT ASTROTURF THAT SURVEY?
Well, I could think that it might be either
a) A Democrat attempting to get traction for their own candidate against Clinton, or
b) Republicans who are trying to bring down a candidate that they actually fear is likely to be the most successful against them
Or both.
I stopped taking Joke Line seriously [if I ever did] after the fraud he attempted with Primary Colors.
Joke Line is the Village’s idiot.
jayackroyd @ 57
Joe may lack the time and legal background to figure out who’s right, so let’s turn to someone with both: looseheadprop.
old gold @ 65
Thanks for reminding. I think that’s all we need to know about him.
old gold @ 65
I don’t know what this refers to, is there a link?
perris @ 68
aha, I googled, he tried to deny authorship of a hit piece and then admitted he lied about his denial
got it
sorry, bad post, please delete
cinnamonape @ 65
In support of your hypothesis, here is the Gallup from the 26th.
Gallup
When it comes time to push Neo Liberal economic policies, journalists working for traditional media outlets tend to parrot the claims of the wealthy about how Neo Liberal economics expands the economic pie.
Now that the free market has come to their business, all of a sudden they are whining.
perris @ 70
more than a hit piece, it was a bestselling roman a clef novel about the clintons, later made into a movie starring john travolta and emma thompson.
it got attention because it was published “by anonymous.” kelin was asked repeatedly by reporters, including some at newsweek, where he was employed, if he was the author. he denied it, and denied it and denied it. for weeks.
then he admitted it.
oops. sorry.
as if that made it okay.
cretin.
dmg @ 17
Or this version:
TAILOR: Euripides pants?
CUSTOMER: Yes, Eumendides, OK?
(Couldn’t resist)
-MS
Peterr,
That is, of course, part of the point. Instead of asking Republican staffers what the bill meant, he could easily have read very clear and in depth reviews of it online. And while the people doing the reviews were often partisan, they were deeply interested in what the legislation actually said. So even if, unlike Joe, they think that there should be effective oversight over domestic spying, their analysis of the contents of the proposed legislation would be spin free.
That is, lhp would do the analysis, say “This is what it means,” accurately, adn THEN say “and it sucks” or “it’s a step in the right direction.”
What dooms Joe to continue making this kind of mistake is he starts from the premise that everything is partisan; he’s bought into the republican meme that there are no facts, only politics. So he thinks his job is to listen to the spin of operatives on both sides, weigh them carefully, and then decide which side’s spin is more accurate.
It doesn’t enter his consciousness to start with what the facts at hand are.
So does anyone want to lay odds on congress passing a law to stop Bush from entering into permanent security agreements to protect Maliki’s government in Iraq until the end of time?
Wow, that is nicely put.
Smgumby @ 77
Anyone want to lay odds on a Bush veto?
dmg @ 74
wasn’t he unmasked by analysis of the writing style?
Michael in Park Slope @ 75
we’re here all week.
tip the waitresses. try the veal.
AnnieW @ 77
Yes, but if he really did what you say, he would long ago have learned that R spin is less accurate (to put it mildly), and would be writing entirely different columns. His error I fear is far deeper than your description.
Why can’t they give Joke Line’s column to Ana Marie Cox? At least she’d talk about ass….um…”spelunking”….
jayackroyd @ 76
Well put!
Peterr @ 78
Ouch. Although, that could not be all bad. Force the republicans to support a veto that promises to keep our troops in Iraq forever. Wonder how popular that will be to the American people?
Elliott @ 80
yeppers. that played a part — i just don’t know exactly how large.
Congress issuing a law stopping a facially unconstitutional and invalid security agreement from taking effect?
This is getting it all wrong – like saying Congress needs to pass a law forbidding waterboarding.
If we are not to impeach Bush, just let the world know that the Congress will not recognize this and will not take action on it.
At what point wukk the insurgents in Iraq and the bulk of the people in the US be on the same side – fighting an emperor here and abroad? Would be nice if the insurgents in Iraq would hold their fire for a few months – our soldiers don’t deserve to be the crossfire, and we will need them here at home to protect liberty ad the constitution.
dmg @ 86
gotta love teh google
joe klein unmasked
Still Walking the Line
Christy’s upstairs!
eCAHNomics @ 82
and compounded, i think, by his elitism – he really can’t take constructive criticism when it comes from those he considers beneath him (either intellectually or in some other way).
As a Professional Journalist™ said about altering Gore’s quote (and then pretending that the pretend quote made him a liar)*:
“It was just one word!”
With kind regards,
Dog, etc.
papertrained!
*Gee … and which paper was that?
Fresh Thread Upstairs.
(smgumby gets the zed!)
I would say the reason citizen journalists are everywhere these days is that professional journalists have abandoned the ethics that you talk about. I don’t think there’s anyone left on television that I believe. I find I have to filter the comments through what I know about their network’s point of view, their own ambitions, etc. Being an old fart, I prefer just to read the AP news wire, but I can understand that most people want to have a story written out for them. Too bad there are few left who do that objectively.
Thunderbird @ 35
The picture that defines this: David Gregory et all doin’ backup dancing to the tune of Rapboy Rove.
Romney has offered the perfect excuse for his own marginalization.
He said that the percentage of Muslims in America don’t necessitate offering a Muslim a cabinet post.
Well, the percentage of Mormons in the US don’t necessitate a Mormon in the Whitehouse.
Just using your math Mitty.
-GSD
Suburban Girl @ 33
I think you are right, but I also think there is some serious oversimplification on both sides. When we criticize the MSM, we have in mind specific examples of really terrible journalist because we want and expect the good ones to be the norm.
I don’t doubt that when they criticize us they have in mind, specific examples (Can you say Pam Atlas?) if really goofy blogs… and be fair there a way way way more goofy blogs than good ones, and they think theat good serious blogs, like this one, are some kind of aberation.
You know what? FDL is an aberation. This is not the work of someone just looking to vent in public, this it the product of a ridiculous # of hours by people already accomplished (and often published) in other spheres.
All day long there is a running discussion going on backstage about what stories are developing and what we might be able to cover that day or that week.
Just like in a regular newsroom. One of my sisters was a “Professional Journalist” (shestarted out in print, moved to radio –BBC–and then was an anchor blond. Now she teaches journalism) and she tells me that what we do is actually run a virtual newsroom.
The biggest difference is that we have a less “top/down” structure than most.
Amateur does not necessarily imply incompetence. It’s etymology derives from the Latin for “to love”
Etymology:
French, from Latin amator lover, from amare to love
From Merriam-Webster.
From the perspective of amateur/professional, if getting paid for your work, earning a living at it, Van Gogh was an amateur, as was Edward Weston, Tchaikovsky and many others. Salieri was more the pro than Mozart.
I believe Joe Klein is not from journalism school, but from American Studies (U. of Pa.?) He wrote a bio of Woody Guthrie that was very unsympathetic to Woody’s egalitarian politics (which he attributed to “hate”) and for some strange reason quite adulatory to Pete Seeger, whom he seemed to perceive as a sort of aristocrat.
Klein was once very industrious: he wrote regularly for the New Yorker, and must have an impressive resume’. He must also have made a pile of money from Primary Colors, which seems to have finished his career/reputation as a straight reporter. He has since joined (if he did not always belong to) the neo-con, deception-is-fine-if-it’s- for-the-little-people’s-own-good school of thought. He appears to enjoy the good things of life.
Stephen Colbert had Keen on a few months back, and it’s even more fun imagining the quote above in his pommy accent. Look up the clip at Comedy Central. “Even the Nazis didn’t put artists out of work.”
http://www.comedycentral.com/m…..ideo=91639
http://www.comedycentral.com/m…..ideo=91639
What is more Orwellian than calling individual citizens exercising their basic rights under the Constitution “Big Brother”? Doesn’t everyone who attended an American college know that Big Brother was the symbol of an all-powerful police state? Citizen journalism is the opposite of Big Brother.
=
looseheadprop @ 95
Yes, the nuances here are important. Not all blogs are created equal as we well know. FDL and others are doing that important fact-checking and critical analysis we hope “professional” journalists would be doing.
I just couldn’t believe that story when I read it in this morning’s WaPo.
Here’s what I emailed Vargas:
Before you engage in the usual droll oh-how-cute, citizens-think-they-can-do-journalism condescension, you guys might want to get your own house in order.
“Journalists, he continues, ‘follow a set of standards, a code of ethics. Objectivity rules. That’s not the case with citizen journalists. Anything goes in that world.’
And sometimes the facts go out the window.”
You mean, the same way they do in the Washington Post?
Yesterday, Dan Balz reported on the Giuliani-Romney spat over whether crime had gone up or down in Massachusetts while Romney was governor. He reported what Rudy said, he reported what Mitt said.
He could have reported the actual crime statistics, which two minutes’ Googling would have produced. This would have allowed readers to conclude which candidate was closer to the truth. But sometimes the facts never come in the window to begin with, huh?
Or take Howard Kurtz, also in yesterday’s WaPo:
“On the morning of Jan. 4, 2008, the winners of the Iowa caucuses — one Democrat, one Republican — will blast into the stratosphere as if they were strapped to a booster rocket.
It’s an immutable law of political physics that those who prevail in Iowa will hurtle toward New Hampshire with bulked-up poll numbers, gathering blinding momentum on the path to nomination.”
But a quick check of Wikipedia tells us that in years where Iowa was seriously contested, the Iowa winner usually lost in NH.
Kurtz didn’t bother to report that. So much for the importance of facts in the MSM.
And that doesn’t even get to the failure of MSM outlets such as yours to provide the facts that we need, like simple comparison/contrast pieces on where the candidates, and the parties, stand on the major issues of the day, such as Iraq, health care, global warming.
Nor does it address the insanely skewed view of the MSM as to *what* the major issues might be. Take the WaPo’s “Ideas Primary” series of unsigned editorials.
There have been 15 such editorials so far. Five have been on the still-distant, still-hypothetical Social Security ‘crisis.’ Two have been on health care, one on global warming, one on terrorism, zero on Iraq – all of which are much more pressing, and all of which have equally great (if not far greater) potential long-term consequences as Social Security’s projected shortfall.
Yet the WaPo editorial staff treats that potential shortfall as more important than Iraq, global warming, our healthcare crisis, and al-Qaeda combined.
You guys have a lot of housecleaning to do. I suggest you get to it, instead of patting citizen journalists on the head and telling them it’s cute that they’re trying to do what *real* journalists do, but they shouldn’t waste their time.
I read Keen’s book when it first came out… actually looking forward to some “independent” insight. Well, it was pretty unconvincing and mostly self-serving. The “people becoming Big Brother”, as rightly ridiculed here, is about the level of “insight” throughout.
Oh, poor Andrew Keen. He snarked and he snarked, but people still keep right on acting like they have some kind of right to express themselves online. Why, it’s almost as if no one’s been paying old man Keen the slightest attention.