We seem headed back to the future--way back. Back to the birth of journalism in the eighteenth century, when "objectivity" in politics was seen as ludicrous, if it was conceivable at all. They were probably right. (Although it would be nice if today's bloggers and reporters at least saw fit to keep the shameless lying about factual matters to a minumum.)
Posted by cygnus at June 12, 2008 04:31 PMThank you turkana, it is one of the greatest realizations and disappointments I've had too over the past 6 months (even greater than Senator Clinton losing ). On the bright side, I've changed my blog reading habits greatly...and discovered new and far more introspective and fair minded bloggers.
Posted by emal at June 12, 2008 05:05 PMTurkana, great and very satisfying post. I found the Jaynes article very honest--surprisingly honest but then again there seems to be a trend of sports reporters being slightly more politically savvy than political reporters, maybe because on some fundamental level they grasp that they are reporting on celebrieties and are not under the illusion that they are here to translate from the gods/political leaders. Your points about bloggers are also well taken.
aimai
So Daily Kos now has no credibility?
I wouldn't go that far. It would completely unsurprise me that they are not trusted, but I think there's still good value there.
Things can change back for the better, too.
Posted by paradox at June 12, 2008 06:22 PMdaily kos is now a very mixed bag, as are most major newspapers. some of the fpers still have credibility, some are mixed, and some have none at all. the rec list has always had very mixed value, but it became quite the joke, during the primaries.
Posted by Turkana at June 12, 2008 06:31 PMTurkana:
In many ways, the blogs are now as unreliable as is the corporate media.
Interesting post.
Posted by Toby Petzold at June 12, 2008 06:47 PM
Did we somewhere miss the point that the whole beauty of the blogosphere is not that it is some pristine realm of truth and justice. Far from it. The power of the blogosphere lies precisely the fact that one no longer have to (nor should one)rely on one news-disseminating authority - whether it be NBC, Fox News, Daily Kos, or Left Coaster. The power of the blogosphere rests in the fact that it is a distributed system - with multiple redundancies - that does not rely on the authority, good faith, or fairness of individual elements (websites/diarists). In other words, the truth (or consensus regarding) emerges from the
collective efforts of those writing and reading. As mere mortals, some of us will be unfair/dishonest one day. Some another day. And others all the time. But as an blogospheric aggregate, a useful and good faith approximation of consensus is achieved. This is all done without appeal to "authority" and directed from no single source. Beautiful, no?
Unless of course you are still looking for "authority" in sites like DKos or any other, looking in other words simply for an online and progressive replacement for the NYT. If you are still thinking in those terms, you are bound to be disappointed. The solution, however, is not to complain that sites are not meeting your expectations of good faith and reliability, but to change your expectations regarding how best to consume news and discussion.
Interesting post. Still wonder if the fuel for the ant-Kos writings is that they, for the most part, didnt back Hillary.
Posted by pragmaticprogressive at June 12, 2008 07:36 PMKOS lost me as much for the viscousness of it's commenter's as well as the fact that KOS himself had such a solid analysis of the primary in January, then completely went into the tank for Obama after that.
Josh Marshall lost credibility when he was saying that bu$hco needed the UN weapons inspectors and could not go to war until UN approved, then let the fear grab him, and became pro war. Yet Josh has credibility with me over Justice and AG firings with good reporting.
The Left Coaster won me with Steve, Eriposte, Turkana, basically everyone on any given day.
At least many blogs are not controlled by corporate dollars, but I think some of the big ones are money making propositions, and so what.
We need to take all sources of information with a little bit of credulity, and yet Digby wins my vote for common sense and credibility ALL of the time.
Posted by kcbill13 at June 12, 2008 09:48 PMOur civic culture suffers because on avaerage, we don't have the kind of reading skills that citizens of what used to be called the East block had: give unqualified trust to no-one, look for confirmation from multiple, independent sources, pay close attention to details, assess reported "facts" against what you see in your daily life.
This kind of thinking should be taught to students in civics classes or at least imparted as tribal knowledge.
The great bloggy gift to all of us -the value of blogs- is that we can exchange ideas and debate with each other across the society.
Posted by Barry at June 13, 2008 09:41 AMI believe that Simplicissimus made some very important points. Far too many, here and at other blogs have felt outrage and injury at what they perceived as unfair or biased "reporting" by once familiar bloggers. That comes from identifying too much, or simply expecting too much of, what are after all, folks, politicians "interviewing for a job" as Hillary liked to say, as if it were a revelation of sorts. I've seen the same effect every two years since blogging began.
BREAKING! Solomon is still dead and no one I've ever met matches up very well with his alleged, divinely inspired wisdom. Every person who blogs, (even me!) has both viewpoint and emotions.
The value of the blogosphere is that we can all meet and SHARE information, insights and even dreams. At the risk of being paternalistic, or misogynistic or racistic: GROW UP!
Some blogsites did truly become advocacy centers for one candidate or another. There's nothing wrong with that! PLEASE remember, a good blogger exercises very little control on opinions expressed on his or her site; that is, if they are going to allow other opinions to be expressed at all. That's one of the best aspects of the LeftCoaster. I think Steve allows a great range of opinion, even obvious trolls, although not every right-wing poster here would earn that appellation.
Crap get expressed. Bias is exposed. HORRORS!
The blogosphere, as a whole is the only place to ferret out the truth which will NOT be permitted to escape the corporate "journalists" control. It's everybody's responsibility to be skeptical of whatever they read online. That's how they become informed citizens; which is the duty of all of us, BTW.
If you don't like a particular poster or post, you don't have to read it. But if you refuse to dirty your mind with the hated maunderings of major websites, you're losing out on the value provided by hundreds of colleagues posting very interesting information.
Please keep in mind, there are whole armies of trolls out there! They post vile shit with the express intent of starting fights and engendering hatred among those who should be allies.
Ignorance, despair, hatred and fear are the coin of the realm of the Gilded Age wealthy class. Divided, in their venal vision, you don't amount to shit. United, you scare them shitless. Long held grudges are more appropriate to grade school and Karl Roves BASE, than presumably progressive blogs. As liberal bloggers, we have a responsibility to ourselves to do better. Another primary election season is over. We all have things to learn from one another. Can we all just move on?
I disagree and wrote more extensively about it at L&L.
That blogs are full of people with opinions is no new revelation.
I think that it says a lot more about us that we feel the need to only read those who agree with us and that those who do not agree with us are "dishonest".
The purpose of the media, why it is the only protected industry by the Constitution, is that it serve the public. That a democratic society can only be free and democratic with access to information. All information.
Blogs are free press - the freest because we are not corporations (most of us) and our goal is not to make money for the corporation (unlike the corporate MSM). What blogs also are - are that they are opinion pages. They are endless reams of editorials.
Providing as much information as possible is important, but every blogger will write their opinion piece from their opinion. Duh.
The fact that my opinion does not match yours is irrelevant. What is relevant is that we have the opportunity to write and post and talk about those opinions and maybe, just maybe, some people change their minds.
There is an enormous beauty in this freedom, but, as with all freedom, it is also messy. It is especially messy because people have the opportunity to be anonymous and swoop in and post something inflammatory or be cruel and fly away unlike one on one real people communication where we would never behave in that way. Very few conversations occur between two people who simply yell "fuck you, you're wrong." That happens all of the time in this medium.
It leads to lazy communication or more aptly, no communication at all.
The piece that Greenwald writes about is speaking the truth: that not having to rely on access to our subjects leaves us more free to write about them. If I knew any of the politicians personally, that I write about (which has only happened once ever in a post that I wrote) I would write about them and their decisions in a much different way, just like when I read some BS hit advertisement against my local congressperson, who I know, I read it differently than I would if I did not know him.
This is all subjective and to claim that it is anything but is dishonest.
Posted by Anjha at June 13, 2008 11:19 AM