Hard News: I've been hybridising for a while now ...
140 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
Are there any links to Simon Pound's story on The Chronicle ? I had a look at the Herald and Stuff, but couldn't see anything.
-
To be a successful blogger, you just have to be able to write well. Just like being a journalist.
Actually, no. Compared stories in the Herald with the press releases on Scoop recently? The key skil four journalists seems to be being able to use the copy/paste function (to the extent that they complain if you send them material in a hardcopy format where they actually have to type it in...)
Snark aside, there's more to journalism than writing - the whole business of balance, attribution, professional ethics. But that's more around the reportage than the commentary side. The difference between a blogger and a hardcopy political commentator is very small, and usually simply a question of medium and whether they are paid.
-
awhile back i did an ego-stroke on RB when i said that he *is* a brand. but i was serious (and not just smoochey-schmoocey) because our new infobesity is pushing us towards trusted information sources.
Or you may dis__trust me as the occasion demands. That's part and parcel of the different way that people respond to blog brands as opposed to mastheads. It's a more personal relationship.
You may read my excellent views --- on, say, social welfare or the enduring greatness of Donna Summer's 'I Feel Love' --- and you may well think, __well, he would say that, wouldn't he? You may still, I hope, find the expression of those views useful.
-
I actually know Jordan's capable of better. I certainly don't think he's going to be running around Hunua hosing down the voters with rhetorical silage.
Quite. You bring up the point that politically identified bloggers need to treat their readers with respect, and do more than simply repeat talking points and slag off their opposition. If you're going to hold a line, you need to provide intelligent commentary and analysis - otherwise you're going to get boring and partisan quite quickly.
And if, like the Standard 2/3 of your posts are about how "hollow" John Key is, then your high quality statistical work is going to look tainted by the piles of poo surrounding it.
The problem is, as always, that fewer journalists are expected to create the same amount of content (more profit), in a way that suits the advertisers. Papers and NZ TV networks are after all simply a means to sell advertising. Quality is going to suffer.
-
Properly trained, paid and resourced journalists breaking well written, well researched, good stories will almost almost blow the enthusiastic online amateur out of the water. The trouble is, they don't exist anymore. Instead, opinion pieces are substituted for reporting and analysis - and everyone has an opinion.
-
Is there a formal, legal definition of "journalist" in NZ? One cannot call oneself an "architect" or "surgeon" without the relevant qualifications and membership of a professional organisation, but that doesn't apply to other professions such as "graphic designer" or "project manager".
If the term "journalist" is protected in the former way, then the discussion of "real" journalists vs bloggers makes some sort of sense. Otherwise, what we're really talking about is paid journalists vs unpaid ones, or formally-trained journalists versus self-trained ones. Or is the definition of "real" journalism a shortcut for "paid for by Fairfax etc"?
The distinction between reportage & commentary makes a lot of sense, and in this case it's true that most bloggers (at least political ones) are closer to commentators than reporters. Commentators in the MSM don't need any sort of qualifications either, though empirical evidence would suggest that being an insufferable tosser seems to help. There are, however, plenty of bloggers who do their own research, if not in a primary sense then certainly as secondary interpreters of others' research. As you say, with the surge in raw information and data being made available online (census data, consent applications, economic trends, public submissions), there is more and more call for the sort of in-depth analysis that the late lamented Keith Ng used to provide, rather than relying on regurgitated press releases and reporting that assumes that readers are illiterate and innumerate.
-
That's what happens when you pretend to offer a space of discussion, whereas in fact all you can do in such a space is rant, since the authors of the pieces themselves wouldn't be caught dead interacting with their readers.
Huge point, that one. It's where the Guardian's Comment is Free blog venture most often falls down -- because those fancy public-school-educated Guardian journalists very rarely get themselves mucky by joining in their own discussions.
It would be remiss not to praise Colin Espiner for his willingness to debate with his commenters.
-
Very few bloggers do reportage. But then, neither does Jane Clifton. She's a commentator.
She sits in the parliamentary press gallery though, presumably, and that gives her access to politicians (other than, you know, McCully*) in excess of what she could get by watching the sessions on the telly and reading the papers and Scoop. So she's a kind of reporter I would say, even if she doesn't break stories.
(*Timing Ranapia's response starting... now)
-
that the late lamented Keith Ng
I can confirm that he's not dead.
-
I was wondering why so many journalists seem to be scared/bewildered/confused by bloggers and blogging. Because, at its heart, blogging is just writing.
Because most bloggers are doing it for free, on the side of their day job. The reaction is not unlike the reaction of people who make a living out of photography getting pissed off at the number of people happy to give away photography for free. It could well ruin their careers.
-
@danyl 'snap'
Heh. Coddington and her weekly regurgitation of cortex-shrinking idiocy is a walking rejoinder to any argument that 'old media' enjoys any moral or intellectual superiority over the blogosphere.
She is a bit of an outlier though so its a bit unfair to keep bringing her up.
-
You may read my excellent views --- on, say, social welfare or the enduring greatness of Donna Summer's 'I Feel Love' --- and you may well think
ignoring the gaffaw at the first part of that sentence and you get to what all this social media palaver is all about, thinking (and engagement).
we humble readers get to bask in the light of blogerati like rb and dpf, but also think and engage with them.
and i hate to snark, but jane just doesn't freaking get it.
-
It's all a bit as if Jane Clifton has only now read a book on PoMo*, and is coming to the party 20 years too late.
(*NB: I only came across PoMo as abbreviation for post-modernism last week, but at least I knew the concept)
-
So she's a kind of reporter I would say, even if she doesn't break stories.
And credit where due: she does sometimes do very good factual analysis.
But I'm not really down with the idea the only reporters qualify as journalists. Commentary and analysis are also journalistic skills, and I'm a long-term fiend for great editorialising.
It's funny though: some quite competent feature writers lose the plot completely when they're asked to write opinion, and news reporters can make awful feature writers. And sub-editors are journalists too.
-
Properly trained, paid and resourced journalists breaking well written, well researched, good stories will almost almost blow the enthusiastic online amateur out of the water. The trouble is, they don't exist anymore. Instead, opinion pieces are substituted for reporting and analysis - and everyone has an opinion.
At which point its worth bringing up the other interesting point in Clifton's piece: this:
Labour and National have far more investigative resources than news organisations, which have also to report the sport, the weather, the crime, the international affairs, the cute animal stories and the celebrity baby names. Labour and National have, in the form of research units and activist squads, the equivalent of a large, dedicated and highly motivated newsroom each, tasked solely with digging dirt on rivals and crafting it into hate-bombs.
And OTOH, its hard to see what difference a research unit would make to Clifton's game-focused style of commentary, since she deals more in political gossip than empirical facts.
-
__that the late lamented Keith Ng__
I can confirm that he's not dead.
Nevertheless, I am in mourning.
-
Clifton's game-focused style of commentary, since she deals more in political gossip than empirical facts.
her description of the public service as 'an ocean of b-listers' raised a few hackles for its brazen partisan-ness.
-
<The Listener joined and guided the national conversation for decades. >
...and look at it now -- a pale shadow of its former self -- its increasing popularity gained by being full of the crap found in NZ Woman's Weekly. A sly lurch to the right over the past few of years with most of its contributors sharing beds with Nats and anonymous editorials relentlessly putting the boot into Labour. Monty Holcroft would be devastated.
-
Because most bloggers are doing it for free, on the side of their day job. The reaction is not unlike the reaction of people who make a living out of photography getting pissed off at the number of people happy to give away photography for free. It could well ruin their careers.
I'm loving this discussion.
Oddly enough, the signs are from the US that getting paid: (a) isn't the determinant of whether or not you're a blogger, and (b) doesn't mean you get to eat.
There's quite a trend towards major publishers taking on bloggers as bloggers. But while I'm sure Andrew Sullivan is being well looked after by The Atlantic, there are a whole bunch of pro-bloggers being run like galley slaves, especially by some tech publications. There's a genuine phenomenon of quite serious health problems amongst people who can't leave their keyboards, even if they want to.
Personally, I'm more vexed about the freelance paid market here being filled up with part-timers who'll work for peanuts than I am about bloggers.
-
This just in:
**CATE BRETT ACCEPTS LAW COMISSION APPOINTMENT**
Cate Honore Brett has resigned from the editorship of the Sunday Star-Times to take up a role with the Law Commission.
Brett, who has a long-standing interest in media law, has been hired as a senior policy and media adviser to assist the commission on a range of projects including the review of aspects of New Zealand privacy law and the review of the regulatory framework for the sale and supply of liquor.
Fairfax Media chief executive officer Joan Withers said: “Cate has been an outstanding leader for the Sunday Star-Times at a time of intense competition.
“She achieved much during her editorship and her recent refresh of the newspaper is now paying dividends in terms of readership growth.
“On a personal level I have found her excellent to work with and I have great respect for her integrity and talent.
“She leaves with our best wishes. This new role is an opportunity for her to further develop her considerable skills and we hope she will return to the company one day.”
The editorship of the Sunday Star-Times will be advertised and applications will be sought from both within and beyond Fairfax Media.
Law Commission President Sir Geoffrey Palmer said the commission was increasingly asked to tackle projects which required a multi-disciplinary approach and he was delighted to have someone with Brett’s skill set on staff.
“We have a trio of projects that require the skills that Cate Brett has – the review of privacy law, the review of name suppression law and the sale of liquor project. This involves extensive community consultation.”
Sir Geoffrey said projects such as the review of the liquor laws crossed the boundaries of several portfolios and would involve a significant degree of public consultation.
“As Sir Ivor Richardson, the retired President of the Court of Appeal once said ‘the Law Commission is the statutory equivalent of a semi-permanent Royal Commission with a roving function’.”
He said Brett’s 20 year journalistic experience combined with her understanding of media law will provide the commission with a vital new dimension.
A former editor of The Weekend Press and deputy editor of The Press, Brett was appointed editor of the Star-Times in 2003. The paper has been awarded Best Weekly Newspaper at the Qantas Media Awards three times in that period.
Brett is currently researching the impact of new media on free speech, including suppression and contempt of court.
She will join the commission in November.
ENDS
Craig? I'm waiting ...
-
since she deals more in political gossip than empirical facts.
Isn't that true of all political reporting? They're reporting on the game, not the policy/outcomes...
-
It could well ruin their careers.
Some careers could use being ruined. The MSM gladly employs the services of Michael Laws, for god's sake, and we're worried about bloggers lowering the level of discourse?
-
(*Timing Ranapia's response starting... now)
Sorry, love, just had lunch -- no room for bait. :) Seriously, folks who think The Listener has been ruined by a pack of Tory Stepford Wives aren't going to be talked in off that particular ledge by anyone. Certainly not me.
It would be remiss not to praise Colin Espiner for his willingness to debate with his commenters.
And I do love it when Colin occasionally asks folks to make their minds exactly whose finger-puppet he is (yes, I'm freely paraphrasing) -- Helen Clark's or John Key's.
I was wondering why so many journalists seem to be scared/bewildered/confused by bloggers and blogging. Because, at its heart, blogging is just writing.
Well, I guess there's the theory (which has some merit but is often egotistically over-stated by some bloggers) that some folks in the MSM just aren't going to like seeing their status as 'gatekeepers' undermined.
OTOH, at the risk of sounding like a pretentious wank, an evolutionary process isn't uniform. You've got new media and technology (and not just blogging/internet) remaking your profession under your feet, then you're going to see some people adapt (however reluctantly), other decry it as the apocalypse (and either adapt or die), and others jam their finger and their ears and start screaming "I can't hear you! I can't see you! GO AWAY!!!"i
-
the signs are from the US that getting paid: (a) isn't the determinant of whether or not you're a blogger, and (b) doesn't mean you get to eat.
i read that. lots of bloggers move to 'professional' only to have their creativity dry up, their motivation sapped by word limits/demands, and their health decline due to poor working environments.
but i thought it was an issue of gold-rush exploitation as opposed to the medium.
-
Isn't that true of all political reporting? They're reporting on the game, not the policy/outcomes...
Not really - we still get a lot of straight reporting of what's going on in Parliament and what the parties are saying. But game-commentary is pretty dominant, precisely because its easier and cheaper than real reporting.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.