For some time now blogging and journalism have intersected in ways that complicate defining the relationship between the two disciplines. As bloggers, it’s increasingly important we play a more active role distinguishing what we do from journalism without diminishing blogging’s relevance. This notion has become even clearer since I started my own blog. A post at Blog Maverick made me think about this issue again.
For reference, Blog Maverick’s proprietor Mark Cuban is also owner of the Dallas Mavericks. Cuban’s views reflect notions about weblogs that aren’t likely to change in the near future. Ubiquity, ease of publication, blogger’s lack of authoritative access: these characteristics accurately represent a large slice of the blogoshpere. And like much of the general public, Cuban uses the word “blog” to describe the message, but blog also describes the Content Management System (CMS) software that allows nearly instantaneous interaction with readers. That’s a technical point, but it’s not esoteric. At its lowest level a blog is simply software used to present what used to be called online journals. Calling a website a blog should not automatically diminish its worth.
In my opinion, the two biggest differences between blogging and journalism are: journalism’s supposed lack of bias (objectivity), and journalism’s (again, supposed) corroboration of facts. Beyond those two traits, blogging is personal; it’s allowed to be. Journalism (good journalism) generally is not. But centuries of wrapping personal bias in Ivy League school degrees have given journalists legal protection and publicly assumed benefit of the doubt. Now, cheap and even free technology allows ordinary citizens to challenge the gatekeepers of information. That’s great news for those of us bloggers who view the Internet as the world’s biggest public access channel.
Moving forward, it will be up to us to further distinguish this craft from traditional journalism.