WSJ Bodyslams Bloggers

Joseph Rago, an assistant editorial features editor at The Wall Street Journal, has published a scathing op-ed that calls bloggers fools that are read by imbeciles. He posits that we "ride along with the MSM like remora fish on the bellies of sharks, picking at the scraps."

Well, my fellow "imbeciles," (geez is that strong or what?) if there's one point here it is that too often we rely on the mainstream media as our air supply. Perhaps it's time we start spotlighting some new, emerging voices and skip the papers for a bit. I am getting a little tired of the same people linking back and forth to each other and to the same stories.

A couple of years ago I ran an experiment where I consumed all my news from blogs. You know what, it worked. I found lots of new voices. I miss reading new blogs. Any takers? Here are five new blogs I like: Conversation Agent, Folksonomy.org, Logic+Emotion, Outside Innovation and eBuiqity. I see that Scoble's on the same kick.

Comments

[Steve Borsch]

Though I'm certain you have fully, consider the source.

I follow over 200 blogs (skim usually...with selective reading of posts) and find that EVERY SINGLE DAY breaking developments, thought leading perspectives and good conversations are occurring in the blogosphere.

Few observations:

1) The Journal's pro-business, pro-Republican and conservative viewpoint (which I use to balance my traditional media consumption with the NYT and my local Mpls Startribune) has become so obvious that their perspectives and viewpoints are becoming increasingly suspect

2) Journalists are getting FREAKED OUT about the thought leaders who are embracing citizen journalism. Yes there is too much inauthenticity and noise in the citizen media world, but organizing principles will emerge to guide transparency and behavior...I guarantee it.

3) Breaking news? That's laughable. Starting with my consumption of news sources on the Compuserve service in the early 90's, I've used mainstream media to augment my "breaking" sources...not the other way around. I'll pick up the paper or catch deeper news programming to get more in-depth facts and information, but find that the either the paper or television have finite amount of "real estate" and thus a blog post -- complete with links -- most often allows me to poke around and get multiple perspectives on a topic. It's far more useful.

Thanks for the five pointers to other thought leaders. Only two of the five were in my aggregator and I'm realizing that pretty darn soon I won't get any work done since I'll be consuming thousands of thoughts a day!

--
Steve

[Narendra]

Steve,

I am not sure you actually read the WSJ piece. Either that or you have chosen to turn it into lurid fodder in a very self-serving manner inadvertently making Micro Persuasion a parody of the stereotypes the article describes.

His essay is incredibly nuanced and centers around the notion that "there is no inherent virtue to instantaneity."

[TMT]

Sounds as if Mr. Rago is feeling a little threatened by the "new media" of blogs, wikis, etc.

But to resort to name calling is a little beneath even the WSJ, I think.

I tend to agree with Steve's comment above.

I used to subscribe to both my local Atlanta paper and the WSJ, but I found that unless I more or less subscribed wholesale the particular leanings of one paper or another, I had to pick through the contents to find content that I could really identify with and appreciate.

Same thing with TV news -- FoxNews or CNN? It's becoming more of an idealogical/political decision than one based solely on quality of conent.

And that is the beauty of blogs as a primary news source. You can tune in to what you want and effectively tune out all the other noise. And if you get tired of a particular blogger, you can simply "change the channel" by unsubscribing from their content or no longer visiting their site.

Yes, you already knew all this. And I think the WSJ and other MSM outlets understand this as well. And that's what's causing them to sweat more and more every day.

[Steve Rubel]

Narendra, it IS nuanced but its laced with language that shows he misses an era that has come to an end. Take a look at how others are reacting.

[Josh Maher]

Interesting article...

Makes you wonder what will replace blogs as individuals look for a new medium to speak to each other.

http://joshmaher.wordpress.com/2006/12/18/2007-prediction-blogs-will-be-replaced/

[Ed]

Talking about breaking news, didn't WSJ get the scoop on the YouTube-Google deal from TechCrunch? Some people don't get it -and they never will. It's not just news, but inspiring posts too. You mentioned L+M, David Armano has a great holiday post:
http://darmano.typepad.com/logic_emotion/2006/12/holiday_manifes.html

Come 2007, I'll continue being an imbecile. I'll continue scanning my RSS feeds, especially:
Seth Godin, Techcrunch, L+M, Creating Passionate Users, Tom Peters, Jaffe Juice, Marketing Profs Daily, adfreaks, adrants, Presentation Zen and of course, Micro Persuasion.

[Amanda Chapel]

"A couple of years ago I ran an experiment where I consumed all my news from blogs."

Boy does that prove out "you are what you eat, or what?

During the Tech bubble, all those who drank the kool-aid were claiming traditional business was dead, too. Those guys all went bankrupt or to jail.

- Amanda

[Tees My Body]

Interesting that we read the same blogs. Joseph Rago kinda sounds like a dick.

[Shel Holtz]

We're not supposed to talk about what we've read in the MSM? Blogs are about conversation. MSM content is discussion fodder. God knows, you can't discuss what you read in the WSJ in the pages of the WSJ.

[Jim Long]

Holy crap! This guy uses " logorrheic", " eschewed", and " solipsistic" in
one graph!! You gotta be freakin kidding me!!

Can you say "supercilious"? This type of dismissive arrogance is emblematic of how scared MSM-ers ( i know i are one) are of social media. I just don't know why every thinks this is a zero-sum game.

[ariel]

Steve,

The "experiment" you speak of should be a daily ritual instead of a temporary discovery. As for the same ol' linking behavior - it all begins with "you" - like, you know, that Person of the Year "you".

[Brian Flynn]

At least John Markham, and many others that you wouldn't expect, admit that they get a lot of thier news from blogs.

that was an interesting op/ed that I will be sure to bring up at
http://www.publicrelationschat.com

[Shel Holtz]

Incidentally, that's just one view from the WSJ. Here's another:

http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2006/12/digging_deeperwsj_gets_comfort.html

[Narendra]

First of all, this is an Op-Ed piece from the WSJ so he is entitled to voice his own opinion and hear the responses. In this case, however, he at least sounds like he is writing for the standard WSJ audience (well-to-do, well-educated, etc.) The fact that bloggers can cherry pick the news for sport is not the most appealing part of new new media.

It is equally obtuse to deny the fact that there is an awful lot of sheer amplification, distortion, and blatant misrepresentation that happens in the blog world.

Stirring the pot and then pointing to the lynch mob only adds credence to his stuffy if subtle argument.

If anything this sounds like a man making a last stand almost for dramatic purposes or "for the historical record" and simply raising some good questions in an op-ed sort of way.

Bloggers *already* have power over MSM. It is time to dispense with the massive chip-on-shoulder syndrome. Why not learn the value of restraint and the ability to make a reasoned argument as opposed to selective amplification?

[Mike Keliher]

Just out of curiosity - honestly; no sarcasm here - how many of those blogs during your "blog-news only" experiment contained primarily original reporting or news?

[Kevin Hillstrom]

There is a grain of truth in what Mr. Rago says. I follow more than 160 blogs, and I've read about Time Magazine's person of the year in maybe a quarter of those blogs.

It's hard work to create your own news. I think it's worth the effort. I'm as guilty as anybody of using media to drive some of my stories. I'll try to do better!

[Matthew Oliphant]

Is it intended irony that Mr. Rago's post is indeed a post? Was it only published online, as the "extra" image implies (or from which I infer)?

It is published in a very blog-like way and allows comments.

[Paul Short]

In my imbisilic, idiotic opinion, that article is just another one of MSM's last-ditch attempts at link baiting.

Next thing you know, they'll be contacting the top people at Digg, Reddit and Netscape and hiring them to promote stories for them.

[Bill Sledzik]

Kevin is right. There's more than a grain of truth in Rago's piece, despite its incredibly pompous tone (I mean, can you BE any more full of yourself?) But, hey, I absolutely depend on the MSM for many of my posts, and by God I'm glad they're out there doing that "watchgdog" thing. There's plenty of room for the bloggers and the MSM to coexist. Big question: Is there enough advertising to support it?

[Sid05]

I' m italian an this kind of opinion are the law for us (the traditional media don' t think that blogger community is a "imbecill", just don' t know what blog is... the only consolation (realy poor) is see you whit the "similar" problem... ;)

(pardon for probably language errors, this is my english)

[Amrit Hallan]

Hi Steve.

I read about it on another blog and then wrote my opinion on my blog. I'm not sure if this comment will appear because I have some issues with Akismet or some other thing.