The Year of the Political Blogger

The New York Times is running a story about how political blogging has arrived as a widely-accepted form of reporting during this election year. In addition to the nationwide TV and radio audiences, the candidates are making efforts to get their message onto the increasingly popular blog network. In doing so, they've elevated bloggers to the level of traditional media reporters at the national conventions. "The major political parties first gave credentials to bloggers in 2004. The Republicans allowed a dozen bloggers to attend their convention in New York, while the Democrats gave bloggers 35 seats in the nosebleed section of the Fleet Center in Boston. This year, the R.N.C. gave credentials to 200 bloggers as a means to 'get Senator McCain's message out to more people,' said Joanna Burgos, the press secretary of the convention. For bloggers attending the Democratic convention at the Pepsi Center in Denver, two types of credentials are offered. The first is a national credential, which offers the same access granted to members of traditional news media organizations. The second, more coveted credential is the state blogger credential. It allows one blogger per state to cover the convention alongside its state delegation, with unlimited floor access." Of course, political blogs are abuzz today with the news of Obama's selection of Senator Joe Biden as a running mate.

Riiiiight

[BitterOldGUy]

For Ms. Spaulding, 45, who works full time as an IT manager at Duke University Press in Durham, N.C., blogging is her passion, an unpaid hobby she pursues at nights and on weekends.

Riiiiight, nights and weekends. Never on the job.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:A good development

[religious freak]

I vehemently disagree. No one denies having an opinion, but one can certainly relate the events that are happening without interjecting your opinion into the mix.

I would prefer to see the future not look like Fox news.

Its not a good thing

[Bill, Shooter of Bul]

I'd say the majority of blogs are just repeating the talking points they pick up on from the established political parties. It gives the illusion of participation in the political process, but really its just an exercise in thought conditioning.

Change of name, same game...

[Grave]

"blogs" are little more than a genuine free application of the press. They aren't (typically) paid for what they write, yet they get "published" anyway, and the better the reporting, the more readership. Because of the open nature, you don't have to wait a couple days for your rebuttal comment (aka letter to the editor) to show up. There will always be "professional" journalists, but I suspect that at some point along the line, blogs will force those people to adapt, and acknowledge their biases and opinions.

Re:A good development

[jellie]

I agree with you that the media (with the obvious exception of Fox News) tries to be unbiased in its reporting, and I applaud them for doing so. But sometimes their attempts to be balanced actually causes their story to be unbalanced. For example, does every story about teaching creationism or "intelligent design" in school really need to have quotes by the Discovery Institute or some other creationist? Why even give them any publicity or credibility?

In my opinion, one of the reasons why The Daily Show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert Report are so popular is their ability to make fun of a story, often at the expense of impartiality. The Georgia-Russia conflict led the media to bring up the "3 AM phone call" ad with respect to a certain candidate's qualifications; Stewart, on the other hand, showed the clips of the media to point out how ridiculous the argument is.

Re:A good development

[religious freak]

No, I don't always disagree with the opinions of fox news (sometimes I do, sometimes I don't), I disagree with the way they represent themselves as dispensing "news" while interjecting their own opinions into the mix. News is great, commentary is great, but the two should rarely if ever, be confused for each other.

For a great way to dispense news, see The News Hour with Jim Lehrer or CSPAN.

Network news is so-so at best - they use way too many superlatives for my taste. How can this be "the worst economy" or "the most difficult time for working families"? It's not quite as bad as Fox news announcing "another liberal agenda", but it's still annoying.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Good PR, bad journalism.

[EWAdams]

Of course the political parties want to accredit bloggers. Most bloggers have an agenda. A blogger who wants to go to a party convention almost certainly supports that party, so they're a good person to let in.

Trouble is, bloggers aren't journalists, and real journalists do themselves a disservice by having anything to do with them. When was the last time you heard of a blogger getting independent corroboration of a story before running it? How many would go to jail to protect a source? How many know the difference between "background" and "deep background"? How many even know the principles of journalistic ethics at all? Most bloggers are anonymous -- there's reportorial integrity for you.

Blogs are water-cooler conversation or street-corner-nut ranting. They aren't journalism.