Blogging: the poison pen

While discussing internet trends, a work colleague said: “have you seen all these blogs; they can say just anything! It’s terrible!” I of course admitted that I too was a blogger, and that I too say just about anything. While there may be problems associated with a democratisation of media, the pros far outweigh the cons.

As the established media struggles to deal with the transition to online publication, an ever expanding army of bloggers relentlessly pumps out material that was once the exclusive domain of professional journalists. While some of the material may be erroneous, poorly researched, biased, or plagiarised the same indictment could be levelled at many professionals.

Professional journalists are no strangers to bias and have been often guilty of plagiarism or using dubious or misquoted sources. While professional journalists may have more highly developed writing skills than the average blogger, anyone who has watched the ABC TV’s Media Watch program would have chuckled at many examples of journalistic ineptitude and malpractice. Media Watch has highlighted many examples of items masquerading as news which are little more than blatant advertisements. Journalists are also bound by editorial policy and the interests of advertisers and shareholders.

Bloggers of course are influenced by no such constraints. Are the views of a professional journalist any more valid that those of anyone else? While a certain proportion of the blogosphere may include dubious material, there is undoubtedly a great deal that is worthwhile and interesting. Anyone with a connection can now easily publish their views to a mass audience; this would seem the ultimate expression of free speech.

The final responsibility comes down to the user. A vast increase in information also increases the need to use that information wisely, cross reference and read between the lines. In this respect, nothing has really changed; you can’t believe everything you read.