BloggerCon: Weblogs and Journalism
Ed Cone (moderator) - EdCone.com
Glenn Reynolds - InstaPundit
Scott Rosenberg - Salon, managing editor
Josh Marshall - Talking Points Memo
Ed: Why did you put your interview with Wesley Clark on your blog when it could have gone anywhere, especially somewhere bigger?
Josh: the whole point was for it to be on the blog
puts big stories/scoops on his site in part to control what comes out; no one else can scoop you or control it
Ed: Idea of building an audience - how did you build the biggest brand in blogs?
Glenn: it was kind of viral, a total surprise; in the early days, he would send links to some of his stories to reporters; got some good linkage from Salon; really took off on September 11 because others began linking to him; a lot "word of email;" otherwise, just links to a lot of people; people that think if you link to others, readers will like them better reeks of the Ted Baxter school of insecurity;
Ed: organizational blogging, editing
Scott: blogging is individual, organizations are hierarchical; happy to let the writers "hold the mic"
Ed: tired question of always "either or or;" what are some of the places that blogs will take journalism that reporters can't go?
Josh: blogging will allow journalists to do a little more; the idea of "off the record" is changing
Glenn: "the backstage" - place where you can say things you can't say in public; the backstage is disappearing, but blogs are part of this change; biggest impact: 9dwarves.com guy trying to get his picture taken with all of the candidates - Kerry's campaign is scared of him and trying to keep him away... he's only had his blog for three weeks!
Scott: bringing out the "backstage" of journalism; start with something like Jim Romanesko's site, concentrated coverage of media itself, opening up a letters page - all opens up the window an inch; now have a whole blogosphere of people writing about what is happening in their newspapers and magazines; institutions are being forced to become more transparent and open; a few weeks after the Blair Affair, the letters editor wrote an essay about how he selects the letters - this never would have happened 25 years ago
Question from the audience: will this reduce the way special interests can influence the media?
Ed: possibly, except that now everyone is a source
Ed doesn't put items from ZDNet on his blog UNTIL it has appeared somewhere else first
Dave Winer: what is it going to take to get these media institutions to open up and let us see what goes on behind the scenes?
Jeff Jarvis: blogging isn't done by the institution, and individuals have to be careful what they write
Josh: what is an institution? Josh tried to write about things that are discussed in the Washington press corps but are never published
Question from the audience (Debbie): seems like the freshest news may be going on blogs now, rather than packaged by the newspapers
Josh: thinks this is true; when he breaks news, it's almost always on his blog; faster - no one wants to be scooped
Ed: how do you put the best stuff with your "mistress" when you have a "wife" at home; how do you marshall your time and resources so that you're doing your day job and getting paid but still do this?
Glenn: is blogging scholarship? Jack Balkin says it is; for him, he'd written in other places (books, articles, etc.); had the scoop on the Bell Labs scandal a week before the NY Times, but didn't publish it because he didn't feel he could confirm it
Ed: the first lawsuit against a blogger is going to be very interesting; no safety net for amateur journalists
Glenn: can get libel insurance through your homeowner's insurance if not getting paid
Amy Wohl: how decide where to publish an item on the blog versus the newsletter/paper?
Ed: no rule yet for telling sources where you will publish the item; doesn't do tech blogging because ZD is paying him for that
Ed: what is the responsibility of a blog? he called out Glenn about not writing about the flip side of media critics of the Administration
Dave: should we read something into it if you don't write about something?
Glenn: do you have the responsibility to opine? and if so, responsibly
Debate about the Plame scandal
Glenn: do I have a responsibility to have an opinion? he doesn't think so; doesn't think it is a scandal, so he just ignored it; there are no journalists anymore - if you can do it to someone from Palooka, then should be able to do it to journalists, too;
Jeff: turn it around and give bloggers the same protection
Audience: what is opinion when it's truth? story of Clinton's $200 haircut and was it true
Scott: there is a spectrum of truth
Ed: is it in question that the identity of Plame was pushed out to journalists?
Josh: in Washington, it's viewed as a certainty; six other journalists
Audience: going back and forth discussing this; this is what you do online
Ed: are you a publication?
Glenn: blogosphere is a "distributed intelligence"
Scott: if this is a huge story, then what Glenn did with it is fine although he'll lose some authority because he didn't cover it
Dave: then we'll know something about Glenn that we didn't know before
Ed: each of us has the right to put what we want on our blog - it's part of the reason we do this; it's now what you "can" do, it's what you "should" do; "as a man," if we call people that question the war "traitors" ("fifth column")....; do you owe your audience?
Glenn: I don't owe you the opinion you want me to have
Audience: one of the things thinks is "super-interesting" is that blogs have some power to say some stories are interesting or not
Ed: blogs frequently feed the media; do you feel frustrated that can't ignite some stories?
Glenn: most of his blogging tends to be what he thinks is getting the interest it deserves; that's the breaks; he needs to have something to add to it
Phil Wolff: why do professional journalists have protection that he doesn't?
Glenn: it's more political backing, no real laws protecting them
Scott: do have shield laws
Audience: if it's in print, kids believe it as fact; if they are journalists, there have to be ethics because otherwise kids can't distinguish opinion from fact
Scott: won't be able to have an internet-wide standard; blogs let you see the process of taking a story
Susan: process of disintermediation, alternative form of journalism emerging, but flip the discussion and ask how the institution should approach blogging, institutional forms of journalism - working with bloggers, in-house, etc.
Glenn: thought the BBC's war bloggers were great (although were missing permalinks); Kevin Sites' blog was great, and he never understood why CNN nixed it
Chris Lydon: Josh's interview with Clark was a completely bloggish breakthrough because it couldn't have appeared anywhere else; it was like an autobiography except it was spoken, it was long (which couldn't have happened in print); how would institutional journalism replicate that with another candidate? this is unfair because very few people have the intellectual capital Clark brought to that interview; any other interview wouldn't have had that candor, no editing, no lead on it
Josh: he approaches these interviews with questions *he* is interested in, which is very different from being in an institution; anyone can give you two minutes of chatter, and his interest is can they talk at length? can't stay on message for that kind of length; people that read the site are willing to read the length; could do it again with another candidate
Oliver Willis: Fox News-ification of news; just say what your biases are
Lance Knobel: outside the U.S., readers are expected to understand that specific newspapers come from a specific view - they're never outright declared
Ed: but we're saying don't declare you don't have any biases
Dave: where do you go from here? will your blog exist in a few years? what do you want to do that you're not doing?
Glenn: doesn't know; as long as it's fun; writing is easy - have to pay attention to the news; there are times when hearing/reading news and just doesn't want to think about it
Audience: we all tend to edit our own opinion of each other; reads all of their sites periodically, but evaluates each opinion based on comparison to others; handed over the requirement to evaluate to the media, but blogs are bringing that back to individuals
Ed: how do you plan to monetize those eyeballs? what if the NYT says we'll hire you as a writer but you have to quit your blog?
Josh: has had that happen with other publications, and hasn't even considered it; can't imagine putting the blog under someone else's logo; because then he'd have to run things by them
Scott: Salon started out that way, rebelling against the SF Examiner; question of the future - hopes we're no longer asking these questions about blogging and money in a few years - don't even try; Salon still isn't profitable as a web-based magazine; blogging is not about money
Audience: doesn't know who the audience is for his blog, whereas when he was with a publisher, knew much more
Ed: the idea of the local blog; thinks of his audience and covers hot, local issues that aren't getting covered; now writing for a local audience, and now they have six blogs covering local politics; he targets his stuff to journalists, political readers, and a local audience
Glenn: SKBubba is blogging locally, has become a factor in local politics; had one newspaper monopoly
Audience: "a bunch of people writing monlogues trying to have a dialogue;" no one person can cover everything, and we have to be savvy media consumers
Jeff: when get to local, becomes incredibly individualistic; bloggers can bring out more information because papers can't show every little fact; he knows his audience
Scott: newspaper editors ask all the time "who is our audience," bloggers know because they're talking back to you
Grant Perry: if bloggers are writing something for public consumption that are subject to libel law, should they not then get the protections as well?
Ed: bloggers that practice journalism should get the protections
Glenn: which are less than people think they are
Scott: these protections are still hugely undecided; courts and law move much more slowly than the blogosphere
Audience: comments on their blogs?
Glenn: became a troll-fest, and links less to blogs that have lots of comment trolls; not willing to put the time into policing them
Audience: comments work incredibly well at Howard Dean's site; the Dean blog is the comments, which are incredible; a strong community
Scott: technology needs to help more with comments
Glenn: when Rush Limbaugh mentions the Dean comments, they'll have a different experience
Audience: would you rather have someone comment on your site or start a new blog? what are the expectations of blogs versus publications?
Scott: expectations for blogs are individual voices, honesty
Audience: in blogs, everyone can speak in parallel and the truth can emerge in time
Jay Rosen: blogs are radical in that they take place in a gift economy - almost zero barrier to entry - but most radical is that the audience as we've known it doesn't exist anymore, while the audience for blogs is not the audience we've imagined for so long just digesting; what we've called "readers" for 500 years are now writers; don't know yet what journalism is under those conditions
Ed: great thing about Dave is his phrase "the web is a writer's medium," which has huge implications for journalism
Tim Jarrett: as long as you have people inside the organization and your readers are not just an audience, find out what's important to everyone
|
