I totally agree with you on this one. Blogging, is well, blogging, and let's leave it at that.

I think a lot of the "is this journalism" debate comes from Dave Winer, the guy who writes scripting news. The debate, imho, only really started after 9-11 when people who were in New York could offer a unique view.

I'm waiting for blogging to be used as a foundation for software tools inside corporations. It's easy to see how they could be useful, but difficult to actually make it happen.

Um, respectfully, Anne?

My interviews, presented as primary source documents. Back-to-Iraq 2.0. The Agonist.

(OTOH, Google News is welcome to include or exclude who-ever - they don't impinge on my news diet, and haven't since they responded to criticism of their news sources early on by excluding 'propaganda' sources - within a month, the variety and predictability of the stories reflected the pre-Google News status quo, and the kooky, interesting material was banished. No more Weekly World News right next to an NYT story. The checkout lane at the supermarket has a greater diversity of voices now. Well not really, but I couldn't resist.)

I think it might well behoove the discussion (or empaw-er it, or something) to note that blogging can be journalism.

And, as an aside, the things you'd get rid of? There's no reason to. I mean, similar to a point I noted today, if your blog were a primary source of cultural information in a major media market, I hope that the posts from Kitty wouldn't, oh, make the cover, necessarily.

But I think that stuff's important.

Another part of all of this is considering process, copyright, ownership, and, in a word, the means of production. Case in point? That Kevin Stiles blog. I never read it regularly; I thought it was pretty obvious media-careerist grandstanding. But I think CNN was off base in having the guy pull the plug on it.

There are some interesting, discomfortable issues about blogs that were there in 'zine days, but not an issue because of the limited circulation.

I think you recall that I think of my blog as a kind of a notebook, and use that as an excuse to not expunge typos or take a jackhammer to run-on sentences. But the next time the WTO runs over my legs with tank, you can bet you'll be able read about as soon as I can write. I think, especiall in situations where you can use that sort of direct personal narrative holographically (remember all that email?) there's a valid set of news sources to look at.

Reflecting in that paragraph, I actually see more of your point now. Traditionally we don't get to see the notebooks. I think they'd be worth seeing, in the name of transparency if nothing else.

On the other hand, since cops' radio calls are recorded and logged, every cop in America has a cell phone and uses that if possible for cop-to-copp communications (a policeman friend tells me). A formal exposre process for notebooks would undoubtedly lead to a great gnashing of teeth.

Hm.

Also, it was nice to think of Bears on Text and realize I've been published by you before ;)

Please forgive any typos and run-on sentences!

The debate rages on and as with most debates, there’s room for more than one point of view.

Thanks for the suggested reads. I did look at the Agonist and I must say his minute-by-minute recapping of MSNBC and BBC News headlines might be a handy source of information for some, but it’s not an intellectual process that interests me very much. If he’s done other kinds of things in the past, maybe I’ve missed them. I also am aware of your interviews and acknowledge that they are a refreshing change from the usual blog fare. Maybe it’s just me, but I haven’t seen a whole lot of one-on-one Q&As in the blog world.

Part of where people fall on this issue may depend on their views as to the importance of the role of the editor. There was a recent interview with a journalism prof in the SF Chronicle who pointed out that the role of an editor is to “Make sure you get it right…If there's not an editor reading it before it goes up, it's taking away a safeguard that's a sensible one in journalism.” As an editor myself I’m biased, but I do think that extra set of eyes makes a difference. Not just to meddle with your wording and futz with your punctuation, but also to do just that…make sure you’ve gotten it right. On a number of levels.

Similarly, I am not convinced that bloggers have the same ethic of balance and fairness that journalists do (or should). It’s great to read compelling personal narrative like you (potentially) getting run over by a WTO tank or the Back to Iraq guy wandering around in the desert. Those provide an important part of the picture, but it’s not the whole picture.

This is admittedly an old-skool sentiment, but I believe that the elements derived from balance and fairness help us achieve context, and that’s what good journalism should strive to provide.

Lots of bloggers are driven by ideology or, at least, torqued toward their own point of view. I know I certainly am. That's good for entertainment value. But when I really want to learn or understand something, I am more likely to trust people who strive for balance.

But perhaps we’re missing the forest for the trees, which was what I was trying to say in the post. Does blogging have to be journalism? Or can it evolve into something different but equally valuable? I think that’s a much more interesting question.

I hear you, especially about the editorial function.

I think one of the things that can happen with der blogs is to offer that slanted news source. Back before world war two, American newspapers were frequently wildly slanted - as is the case with some British papers today - and looking back at the level of investment indoemocratoc participation that accompanied the publication, I have to say I think that's a good thing.

Blogs give us back the slant, partly.

I think the Agonist's stuff (plus the comments on the site) is dissimilar only in scope to blogging in general - where the general effect of the linkpointers might come only from multiple sources otherwise, he's very concentrated on it, and it makes his thing almost like aclipping service or newsletter.

He's an investment research analyst, so there's certainly some careerism involved. But in this case good for him.

regarding the use of blogs as primary source documents, it's something that seems simply not to be of interest to a lot of blog readers. But since I don't imagine (and my stats tell me) most of my readers arrive via google and not blogs (with some exceptions, such as your and eric's site, easily top referrers) I'm happy with the material, if unhappy at my process toward incorporating it reglar-like.

Balancing the material with respecting the understandable print-gets-first-exclusive desire of the buying market is interesting to say the least. The lead times are like to kill me! But oh well.

It's interesting that you think "slant" is a good thing. I'll have to think about that one.

Isn't it funny, I don't remember ever having a "are zines journalism?" debate in the '80s/'90s. Most of the practitioners I knew didn't want to be caught dead with such a legit label. Is it the added visibility and slick means of production that make the difference? I wonder.

Hi! Bounced over from your post on blog sisters because it was so fresh and beautiful, I just had to come see your house.

You guys sure are serious! All I was going to say at the end of this posted entry was:
I think of email as replacing snail mail.
Instant Messaging has replaced the telephone.
Blogging is all of it: a giant, global conference call, including anyone that wishes to join, allowing for silent visitors, all the while, the unmistakable scent of synapses firing, bouncing off, catching fire, turning into a firewords display, oops, "fireworks" and confetti-ing down, while we ooh and ahh and oogle each other's blogs. Like the glitter of the auroral dance overhead, except in our laps.

Thank you for posting "Baking Days" on blog sisters, else I might not have ever run into you.

Thanks for stopping!

We're not always this serious, but once Mike & I get started on questions of journalism, there's no stopping us.

Seems to me that blogging is a hybrid of journal-ING and a guestbook. Today is the first time I've looked for this technique, and am intrigued by your discussion here. I am an old-fashioned web designer, and am used to more creator-intensive journals. (Such as the one at http://gotouring.com/razzledazzle which I designed for my brother.) Journals have a long history and can offer wonderful insight to later generations.

Back to the queation. Perhaps some folks are confusing the medium with the content.

For example, would you say that an article printed in a club newsletter is journalism? Does something qualify as a newspaper if there are only 5 copies printed? 50? 500? If no one buys it (or runs ads to support it) and it's someone's private podium, is it still a newspaper?

When is a one-woman publication "journalism"? If I write things and let others read them -- it could be a newsletter, it could be self-promotion or advertising, it could be vanity, it could be a serial book or a journal.

Whether in print or electronic; I think it is the content, the intent, and the public-ness which determine if something is "journalistic" or not.

So, to answer your original question, "Is blogging journalism?" -- SOME IS, SOME AIN'T !!

I hear you, especially about the editorial function.

I think one of the things that can happen with der blogs is to offer that slanted news source. Back before world war two, American newspapers were frequently wildly slanted - as is the case with some British papers today - and looking back at the level of investment indoemocratoc participation that accompanied the publication, I have to say I think that's a good thing.