NI bloggers make MSM splash…

Hmmm… not sure what this will do for the reputation of online commentary…

  • Crataegus

    Very selective and says more about the standards of the Telegraph.

  • I Wonder

    Hmmm, so much for BTinvestigative powers; the reporter didnt see that one of the sites extolled freedom of speech to such an extent that referring to a black person (in 2007) as a “coon” is apparently acceptable.

    “Standards of online commentary”, indeed.

  • Mick Fealty

    Selective yes. But ‘Internet blabbermouths’ definately rings a bell!!

  • Pete Baker

    Perhaps Mick, but it’s hardly a feverish debate.. and the Slugger piece is from a few days ago and the quotes used comments rather than the blog post itself.

    But there is a fundamental problem with the article which indicates a journalist who just doesn’t get it and it’s in that term ‘feverish debate’.

    Rather than looking at what blogs were actually talking about, or indeed feverishly discussing, there was a determination of what we should be discussing, followed by a trawl to pick out the most sensationalist comments to fit the article’s agenda.

  • parcifal

    also the line “Like a gaggle of drunks propping up a bar at midnight” brought a wry smile.

    On Friday/Saturday nights there’s a definite surge on Sluggers after the pubs have shut.( hic )

  • Bono

    ‘On Friday/Saturday nights there’s a definite surge on Sluggers after the pubs have shut.( hic )’

    Too much information, parcifal :0)

  • Greenflag

    Give them nothing -not even a euro cent and when we’re finished giving them nothing give them more nothing:) Why waste good money on a failed political entity? Just look at what HMG has wasted on the place ? One shower of gobshites harking back to dreams of former imperial glory and Unionist supremacy and the other shower dreaming of a united ‘socialaist’ i.e poverty stricken Ireland ? *&*#@#&****

    No thanks -Keep the money at home Bertie and lave those Northern lousers to keep beggin from Her Majesty . They never appreciated something for nothing before and they’re not likely to start now.

    It will be time enough to spend Southern taxpayers hard earned money in Northern Ireland after a fair Repartition of NI is implemented by a neutral international agency ! Hrrrrrrruuuuumph!

  • willis

    The good thing is that there cannot be many Kim Bielenbergs working as journalists in Ireland. I suspect this sort of freelance journalism gave rise to the expression “Hack”

  • parcifal

    peteb,
    there was a determination of what we should be discussing, followed by a trawl to pick out the most sensationalist comments from selected journalists to fit the article’s agenda.

    pot calling kettle black, with the added highlight.

  • Pete Baker

    Clearly it’s not just some journalists who don’t get it.

  • The lobster

    Am I a drank blabbermouther or Kim wrote twice “A gentleman going under the heretical name ‘Manichaeism'”?

  • Cormac

    Ah don’t mind ’em – the Belfast Telegraph is just running scared because there’s better commentary here than on their site (and their commentators get PAID)!

    It’ll probably backfire – no such thing as bad publicity etc.

    😉

  • Total word count of that article was 328 words and to me it looks like 159 of them were quotes.

    I’m not sure about the sentence ‘Not every cyberbabe on this side of the border is thrilled about sending the cash to those ‘pesky’ Northerners, either’ though.

    I take it she got paid for doing what bloggers, or is it blabbermouths, do for nothing.

    ‘Blabbermouth’ great title for a blog though! 🙂

  • Bono

    ‘No thanks -Keep the money at home Bertie and lave those Northern lousers to keep beggin from Her Majesty .’

    Er, aren’t you putting the cart before the horse, Greenflag? It’s freeloader Liz who’s being kept in luxury by the ‘Northern lousers’ :0)

  • Coming from the Belfast Telegraph – Northern Ireland’s worst newspaper, I’ll take this as high praise. It’s selective self-serving tripe from Kim – whose own rag is hardly adequate to provide the bottom of a birdcage with cover.

    If Kim, or the BT, ever wishes to seriously discuss blog coverage, I’m sure Mr Slugger and myself would be capable of dealing with any sensible questions asked.

  • BP1078

    OK, hands up, who still actually pays for the Telegraph?

    As opposed to 5 years ago, the Tele is no longer compulsory evening reading; it’s now only one part of the online jigsaw where I get my news from.

    Some things it’s always going to do better than the likes of Slugger such as ermmm… well, yes…I don’t know what I would do without the death notices and the crossword. And the letters page, which seems to consist mainly of Mr Angries who haven’t got the bottle to spout their nonsense on a forum where someone might answer them back.

    Bottom line is that the Tele has lost its monopoly and it’s starting to panic.

  • I wonder

    “selective self-serving tripe” – lol, much of the output of ATW could also be described as such, not to mention the massively inflated ego of its head contributor!

  • Ball, not man?

    Bitterness is such an undesirable quality.

  • Comrade Stalin

    David Vance writes :

    Coming from the Belfast Telegraph – Northern Ireland’s worst newspaper

    David, for once we agree. Have you ever tried reading Pravda ? It’s a splendid read, the Starry Plough isn’t a patch on it. I recommend you look into the back issues. It’s not quite the same as it was when I was editing it. I once wrote an editorial at the same time as planning the invasion of Poland. And they say men can’t multitask! Well, apart from Khrushchev.

    [Play the ball, Comrade – edited moderator]

  • graduate

    Greenflag
    are you usually this victor meldrewish or is it just today?
    aren’t all irish republicans supposed to be full of wit and blarney a la john ford & the quiet man,
    not crabby like dour prods?
    incidentally, i don’t care where the money comes from- Charley H’s is a good as anybody’s and can we get some of the Northern Bank money back please?

  • James

    Did this piece not come from the Irish Independent?
    It’s true the Telegraph isn’t what it used to be – in no small part down to the fact the Independent, which owns it, has continued to cut editorial budgets.
    Despite the shortcomings of a paper like the Tele, I have still to come across a blogger who breaks serious, public interest investigative stories on a daily basis like David Gordon or Claire Simpson in the Irish News.

  • Greenflag

    Bono,

    ‘Er, aren’t you putting the cart before the horse, Greenflag? ‘

    What Cart ? What Horse ? This is the Republic and if those eejits like to keep Liz in the manner to which she and hers have become accustomed then that’s their business but if the mothers get billions from the Republic then they’ll only be giving more to Herself and her ilk . Her and Popey have more than enough 🙁

  • Greenflag

    graduate,

    ‘are you usually this victor meldrewish or is it just today? ‘

    Victor is a soft decent english curmudgeon and a much underrated observer of the human condition 🙂 GF on the other hand is just a hard nosed mean North Dub who can oucrab any dour prod before or after breakfast , dinner and supper 🙂 Shower of wimps most of them anyway apart from a good rugby player or two and maybe one or two soccer players and yer man Jimmy Galway and the late Derek Bell not forgettin Saint Dunseath .Other than that complete and utter shitehawks especially the politicians -40 feckin years and still nothin learned 🙁

  • jone

    James is right it did come from the Indo originally – as the Tele is also owned by Tony O’Reilly they can lift stuff at will – but who knows why they bothered with this shit.

    If anyone ever has the misfortune to read the Tele on a Saturday the features section is massively bulked out by lifestyle stuff which has been in the (London) Independent during the week.

  • Mick Fealty

    James,

    I’ve heard that too, but the II’s website is a mess compared to the Tele’s. Looks like a clip from a longer piece.

    But we are in danger of drifting towards a false dichomy/argument. The Tele has quite a few talented journos and columnists (and lost few in the cuts of the last few years). It is always easy to snipe and make cheap points, especially with a flame piece like this one.

    Good journos should be doing that kind of leg work to bring in real stories. Indeed there are few high profile blogs which appreciate and acknowledge that fact as openly and as fulsomely as Slugger. However blogs undoubtedly do other things better than papers. Here’s an extract from a recent piece of mine in the Irish Times:

    American journalist Jay Rosen believes that the key strength of political bloggers doesn’t lie in breaking stories, but in their capacity to endlessly mull over detail and nuance. In the wake of Lott’s departure, he noted that the blogosphere spent hours, days and weeks “sifting through information, rescuing facts and arguments from the news cycle’s strange habits, while loosening up the lines of debate”.

    It’s not that newspapers cannot do this too, they just don’t. At the same time, I do wish some our barfly commenters would cop on to the fact that not everyone who reads them agrees with them, and that they put a bit more work into making their points coherent and credible.

    I’m afraid, for all the ragged incoherence of our ‘blabbermouths’, Slugger adds up to considerably more than the sum of the parts. It’s something that mainstream journalism seems reluctant to publically acknowledge. It’s a point Suw Charman made nearly two years ago at the London School of Economics:

    Blogger Suw Chaman believes that blogs are more than fact checking agents, and the impression that blogging is an all-amateur business is wrong. The networks, in which most bloggers conduct work, provide a kind of ongoing informal peer review. Indeed the speed at which inaccuracy can be found out in such networks actually intensifies the pressure on the blogger to get it right first time. Serial unreliability usually leads to rapid falls in readership.

    However she went on the argue that the either/or premise of the debate overlooked the growing (and largely un-talked-about) symbiotic relationship between mainstream journalists and the blogs they read. She believed there is an opportunity for bloggers and journalists to work together and circumvent the widespread mistrust and misunderstanding amongst the mainstream media.

    All I can say is: “Kim, don’t give up the day job! “;-)

  • John East Belfast

    This guy knows little about Blogging which I would more equate to Boxing.

    He clearly doesnt know the difference between a Jab, a killer right hand or sustained kidney punches.
    Every now and again we even get paramilitary restorative justice where a few others might jump in the ring in a tag type scenario for a free for all.
    Plenty of below the belt stuff as well.

    However there are some excellent fights on here and I can honestly say that on many issues Slugger has changed, formed and moderated my opinions.

    My comment about Jack Charlton and geneology is old hat on Slugger and I through it in lazily which was no more than a glancing blow of some nationalists ear.

    [edited moderator]

    I still buy the telegraph every night !
    The Newsletter should take it on head to head.

  • Pete Baker

    “This guy knows little about Blogging which I would more equate to Boxing.”

    No, John.

    That’s just the way you, and some others, chose to comment.

  • Mick Fealty

    Within the usual legal limits, each to their Pete, each to their own.

  • John East Belfast

    Pete

    Well we are wearing gloves and playing by Queensbury rules.

    Perhaps the ball not man rule should be changed to keeping it above the belt.

    How would you describe your blogging if it is not verbal sparring ?

  • Pete Baker

    Indeed, Mick.

    But it’s the difference between what blogging is.. and what commenters make reading a blog, and the comments zone, feel like that I was getting at.

  • Mick,

    I suggest the blogosphere operates in several different ways.

    It has proven excellent in exposing fakery masquerading as “real journalism”, resulting in the likes of AP having to withdraw hundreds of fauxtographs.

    It provides commentary which is not easily found within the MSM. You’re right to say that the BT has some talent writing for it. It also has a surfeit of tired hacks churning out cliches on a weakly basis. My challenge to the MSM, including the BT, is to provide challenging commentary. I havde argued for years that it fails in this regard. For example, where are the commentators arguing FOR the Iraq war, where are the commentators who oppose the Belfast Agreement/SAA, where are the commentators who take issue with the daily political grind? I can think of about one or two – at best – of locals who do so, people like Eamonn McCann and Alex Kane – but they are exceptions.

    From where I stand, the best writing is found across the blogosphere – right and left – and the likes of Kim should read a little more deeply before handing in nth rate copy.

  • Pete Baker

    To answer your question, John, on “How would you describe your blogging if it is not verbal sparring ?”

    What I’m attempting to do is to get down to a level of detail that reveals what is actually going on. Not arguing one version of events against another version. Nor beating, or boxing, another person’s argument into submission.

    In short, sparring verbally or otherwise isn’t of interest to me when I blog. It’s probably why I have little patience with those who attempt it.

  • John East Belfast

    pete

    perhaps its the difference between the political activists amongst us and the academics ?

    getting down to the level of detail requires us to argue and debate ideas – even in my daughter’s school in the debAting society they have a “proposer”, an “opposer” and the “floor” and a vibrant discussion

  • Pete Baker

    “perhaps its the difference between the political activists amongst us and the academics ?”

    Probably.

    But you’re talking about a “debating society”, John.

    It’s not blogging.

    There is a difference, even if some people don’t seem to understand that fact.

    For example, debating ideas has little to do with delving into the necessary level of detail – i.e. fact – that I’m talking about.

    A debating society would get stuck in an argument at a much shallower level.. and would probably think it had a resolution at the end.

  • Comrade Stalin

    For example, where are the commentators arguing FOR the Iraq war, where are the commentators who oppose the Belfast Agreement/SAA, where are the commentators who take issue with the daily political grind?

    David, you’ll probably find the media are fairly reflective of the general population in this respect. Few people support the Iraq war, a significant majority voted for the Belfast Agreement, and so on. After all, that’s who they have to sell their papers to. Blogging and the print/broadcast media have totally different commercial pressures associated with them.

  • Pete Baker

    Comrade

    I think you’ll find that David’s point may be that it is not journalism’s self-declared role to tell some, or even most, of the people what they want to hear.

  • John East Belfast

    pete

    “But you’re talking about a “debating society”, John.

    It’s not blogging.”

    well it must be over my head then as I have come to equate blogging with what happens on Slugger.

    would the very name ‘slugger o toole’ not conjour up an Irish brawl ?

    Is a slanging match not what Mick originally had in mind ?

  • Pete Baker

    “Is a slanging match not what Mick originally had in mind ?”

    I think you’ll find the answer to that is NO!

    But you asked me to describe my blogging.. and I have answered you.

    One more point, you still seem to equate blogging with what occurs in the comments zone.

    It’s not.

  • Pete B,

    Exactly. And your response to John at 11.42 is also spot on.

  • John East Belfast

    pete, david

    “One more point, you still seem to equate blogging with what occurs in the comments zone.”

    yes but slugger wouldnt exist without the comments ?

    Surely your post is of no value unless you get feedback ?
    You may as well be writing your own private diary

    and if I am not blogging when I comment what am i doing ?

  • Pete Baker

    “and if I am not blogging when I comment what am i doing ?”

    Commenting.

  • The Dubliner

    “Slugger adds up to considerably more than the sum of the parts.” – Mick

    Exactly – it’s an emergent phenomena. It’s the organic aspect of multiple posters ‘debating’ with each other that the comments section of the posts to generate perspectives that one person alone cannot. With commentators on mainstream media, you get a perspective that is in accordance the particular editorial agenda of whichever paper you choose to purchase (a choice made by whatever your existing political disposition happens to be). So, in the mainstream, you get nuns singing hymns from a known hymn sheet to nuns. Here, you get what Leonard Cohen called “a drunk in a midnight choir.” Maybe it’s because I’m tone deaf, but I prefer to listen to voices that sing out of tune.

  • Pete Baker

    “Exactly – it’s an emergent phenomena. It’s the organic aspect of multiple posters ‘debating’ with each other that the comments section of the posts to generate perspectives that one person alone cannot.”

    Indeed, provided the comments add value to the original post.

    All too often they just box away regardless..

  • “Hmmm… not sure what this will do for the reputation of online commentary…”

    That they are people with nothing to say writing for those with nothing to do.

    I think it’s high time we had another thoughtful discussion on what to call Derry.

    We’ll show ’em, you betcha.

  • The Dubliner

    “That they are people with nothing to say writing for those with nothing to do.” – Smilin’ Jim

    Yes, that’s what it says about journalists and those who read newspapers, but what does it say about Bloggers?

    I surmise that it ‘says’ that a journalist is someone who thinks that only his or her opinion is valid because a few years at a Polytechnic reading course material about Watergate followed by a job that requires no more investigative skills than finding out where office inbox for press releases and agency stories is located confers a monopoly of brilliance and infallibility upon the low-waged dreck.

  • Crataegus

    Recently we had some very heated comments within Republican ranks any of which, taken out of context, could be made to look incoherent. Overall what we had was first a denial that there were significant problems followed by what could only be described as an outpouring of pent-up anger. Sanitising the exchanges may have been all very gentlemanly, but would have disguised that a raw nerve was exposed.

    Blogging is useful, provided there is an adequate body of informed opinion on an issue. It provides a collective memory and experience and can rapidly check and challenge the validity of a positions or view. It allows an understanding of the views of those of different opinion, the strength with which they hold that view and the reasonableness or otherwise of the various positions taken. But don’t underestimate the importance of the occasional outbursts of anger. That said some of the comments can degenerate to the puerile and who can resist putting the boot in occasionally?

    On the ‘playing the ball’ often what happens is the ball is kicked straight at the opponent, the boxing analogy is probably more accurate. Blogging is a 21st century contact sport it is not an 18th century social occasion with the inferred slights and social hierarchies though often deadly slights abound but many are close to the belt.

    The piece in the BT was a cheap column filler.

  • The Dubliner

    I think he meant ‘box’ as in categorising those who express an opposing perspective or their argument as an expedient way of dismissing without actually considering/addressing the salient points e.g. “that’s just more spin from the SF Blogging Committee,” “all unionists think like that,” or “you’re not from the north, so you don’t know what you’re talking about,” etc.

    I can’t fault the commentators, generally – although some are more articulate and more linear in their thought processes than others. It’s the propagandists that I can’t be arsed with, so I skip right their posts. I read Slugger with greater regularity a year or so ago. I noticed then the general sense of impotence from a number of commentators, in that they weren’t actually addressing their arguments (spiels) to each other, but were going over each other’s heads and addressing them to unspecified others i.e. trying to influence any ‘outsiders’ who might be reading Slugger; and, presumably, in a position to effect changes in the political process that the posters themselves felt powerless to do. That was particular to the internal dynamics of the north. I wonder if Slugger was linked on, say, Time Magazine’s site for a week or so and received an influx of yanks, would that tendency to spin to outsiders resurface? Or maybe it was never there, and I was just projecting a flawed assumption…

    Still, for those of us who are burning the midnight oil for one reason or another, Blogs provide a distraction during a bored moment – and harbouring no greater need or ambition for Blogs than that, I’m not complaining.

  • Mick Fealty

    That’s a very perceptive piece TD. Particularly this:

    I noticed then the general sense of impotence from a number of commentators, in that they weren’t actually addressing their arguments (spiels) to each other, but were going over each other’s heads and addressing them to unspecified others i.e. trying to influence any ‘outsiders’ who might be reading Slugger; and, presumably, in a position to effect changes in the political process that the posters themselves felt powerless to do.

    I can understand why this happens, it’s the sheer volume of people reading Slugger, and people what to get ‘key messages’ across. But it arises from a fundamental misunderstanding of why online communication makes compelling reading even for those not participating in the discussion.

    It is above all about conversation. Now it may seem to someone landing for the first time as if it is fraught, contentious and unstructured, but conversations often uncover stuff that might otherwise have lain unnoticed before. There are often new insights that arise from the battle between opponents that come to be of benefit to both.

    That breaking of the conversation that you’ve observed is a bit like that moment in Morcambe and Wise, when they stop performing to look at the camera. It’s weird and offputting and you wonder what they are up to. And to an extent people stop listening.

  • I Wonder

    I did not write comment 17 and I am rather fed up with being impersonated. Will a moderator please confirm?

  • I Wonder

    On topic: There is undoubtedly very good writing in blogging but it is necessary to distinguish between that activity as an egotistical function and genuinely durable and insightful observation. There is still a wide gap between most NI-related bloggers and the likes, for instance, of David McKittrick.

  • Mick,
    Why do you quote Suw Charman from 2 years ago

    ‘blogs are more than fact checking agents, and the impression that blogging is an all-amateur business is wrong. The networks, in which most bloggers conduct work, provide a kind of ongoing informal peer review. Indeed the speed at which inaccuracy can be found out in such networks actually intensifies the pressure on the blogger to get it right first time. Serial unreliability usually leads to rapid falls in readership.

    That’s a very long time ago.
    Why quote from any ‘experts’ on the blogosphere ? There are only a certain amount of blogs any one person can read.I’m sure Suw Charman only read blogs of interest to him/her so I’d say that’s not a very reliable source.Two years ago did we have as many ‘all-amateur’ Bebo or MySpace blogs as we have today?

    I’ve noticed the amount of blogs on your blogroll that have long since disappeared and I’m not surprised that you haven’t time to ‘blog properly’ with the ‘commenting forum’ you run here.

    Another point I find interesting is that very few of the commenters on this post have links to blogs, they’ve only links to e-mail addresses. The occasional comment I receive on my blog is 95% of the time from another blogger.
    🙂

  • The Dubliner

    “There is still a wide gap between most NI-related bloggers and the likes, for instance, of David McKittrick.” – I Wonder

    I’d be surprised if he wasn’t more professional at writing political articles, since writing political articles is his profession. It’s a bit like saying that a pharmacologist writes more informative articles about divalproex sodium than a carpenter does.

  • I Wonder

    Dub

    Would it be your preference to read uninformed articles on divalproex sodium?

    Like me you have an interest in politics, so isn’t it more natural to desire an informed POV than the expression of a perspective which can, in blogging, be influenced more by the blogger’s self-perception of infallibility?

  • Smilin’ Jim

    I think it’s high time we had another thoughtful discussion on what to call Derry.

    Your wish might be granted sooner than you think:

    Court refuses Derry name change

  • The Dubliner

    I Wonder:

    David McKittrick is a professional journalist – commenting on political matters is his full-time job. Bloggers and Blog commentators are amateurs (not used in the derogative sense) who comment part-time and apply a less rigorous criteria to research, etc. If Blogland ever generates the levels of revenue that newspapers do, then they can also afford to hire professional journalists of Mr. McKittrick’s exceptional calibre.

    However, being a professional journalist doesn’t necessarily mean that the quality of your journalism is to a high standard. Most journalists are frontal lobe amputees who are merely mouthpieces for popular consensus, editorial agendas, assorted prejudices, or other interests – they’re employees who write whatever they are told to write. And as for the bulk of them being “informed” – oh dear!

    I’m not sure if you are arguing that all Bloggers do not have an “informed POV,” as I doubt you would read Blogs if you believed all posters were ignorant of the relevant subject. It’s like anything else: if there isn’t any evidence backing it up, don’t believe it. Whether ‘it’ appears on a Blog or a newspaper isn’t relevant in that respect – although folks do have a dismal tendency to believe what they read in the papers. Perhaps they also assume that journalists have an “informed POV” simply because they’re journalists? Isn’t Jade Goody a journalist?

    Mick, I believe, is a journalist. Pete certainly does a great deal of diligent research for his Blog articles, taking time to provide supporting links, etc. Since the format is discussion-based, rather than the no-feedback format of print, the dynamics are different, anyway.

  • I Wonder

    “Most journalists are frontal lobe amputees ”

    Hmmm. Perhaps we don’t read the same press.
    Can’t help but reflect on the delight with which certain bloggers advertise their presence (and, either consciously or unconsciously, their ego-trip motivation)in a mainstream media which they otherwise deride at every opportunity and through which they convey messages inconsistent with those conveyed through their blogging.

  • “Most journalists are frontal lobe amputees “

    That’s so unfair. To frontal lobe amputees.

  • Next it’ll be a discussion about cognitive impairment, I suppose.

    To get replies to comments on this forum do I need to join/pay/not be a blogger?

  • Your wish might be granted sooner than you think:

    I’m feckin’ prescient.

    The blogsphere is a place for serious argument in the tradition of the Roman Senate, trust me.

    For instance, if I could transport all the Sluggerettes to one spot during one of these learned discussions, we would witness the group practicing sonorous elocution and theatrically gesticulating in their bathrobes, knobby knees and all.

    Close is good enough in horseshoes and hand grenades.

    PS: So often bloggers are the parasites that live off what those poor lads with the frontal lobe problems produce, ya know. Our learned sponsor excepted, of course.

  • Slugger O’Toole Admin

    Cybez,

    You have a penchant for asking questions that have no obvious answer. But I can answer one. I quoted Suw partly because it was from two years ago.

    There were also people at that seminar who were pissed at the idea that people on this side of the Atlantic were still arguing there was any merit in the journo/blogger dichotomy – two years ago!

    Jim,

    I square it like this. I like good journalism. I generally don’t blog bad journalism. Everthing that we blog from the MSM is either linked or acknowledged. Often we provide verbatim reports from otherwise etherial broadcast media events that would get lost.

    Whatever simple thoughts that link these materials are ours as bloggers, not the journalists. Though as Slugger is an open resource they are welcome to borrow what they will. But in truth few feel the reciprocal obligation to acknowledge what they do take out of it.

    Some of what goes out of here is simple disaggregation of established news flows. But some of it is genuine, quality blog journalism that often stands up well against the mainstream’s output. And that capacity that goes well beyond ‘our learned sponsor’.

    Whilst I fully accept Kim’s bar room analogy is true enough of one aspect of the site, the conversations here often have an important, re-contextualising effect on stories that a journalist’s deadline would otherwise (necessarily) kill.

    Mick

  • Thanks Mick 🙂

  • “And that capacity that goes well beyond ‘our learned sponsor’.

    Thanks a bunch but I’ll be the judge of that. The consumer, not the provider, always is. That is, of course, until you collectively come up with a means to establish and enforce journalistic standards.

    God knows, it’s tough enough for the pros with the likes of Judith Miller and Jayson Blair, etc. on the loose. Best of luck.

  • manichaeism

    Well, all this has been very interesting but I am just happy to be quoted in two newspapers!

    Fame at last! LOL!

  • The Dubliner

    “Next it’ll be a discussion about cognitive impairment, I suppose.” – Cybez

    Heh. Considering how quickly the “RUC: guilty until proved innocent?” thread turned into a heated slagging match about the Holocaust, the alleged pro-German sympathies of long-deceased local politicians in the Republic, the Great Famine, Enniskillen, the “moral narcissism” of others, and all manner and methods of irrelevancy, you’re not far wrong there. Still, rich tapestry…and all that.

    “So often bloggers are the parasites that live off what those poor lads with the frontal lobe problems produce…” – Smilin’ Jim

    Bloggers might term that relationship ‘symbiotic,’ but the lack of mutualism means that ‘parasitic’ is accurate. It doesn’t apply Blog commenters, of course, so no defence is offered here.

    “Well, all this has been very interesting but I am just happy to be quoted in two newspapers!” – manichaeism

    Yup, plus is a snappy one-liner. It put me in mind of a great quote from a member of The Late Late Show’s audience during a debate on economic crisis back in the 80s, proffered in sincerity as a solution to the crisis: “We should hand the country back to the British; and apologise for its condition.” How times have changed.

  • Mick Fealty

    TD,

    The mutualism exists, just unacknowledged on one side. I have had one whole sentence appear in a mainstream editorial. But more often the signs that our stuff is being read are more subtle than that.

    I should also say that no one seriously contested Suw’s point at that LSE seminar. As John Lloyd pointed out on More Four News late last year, his colleagues on the NY Times deliberated for a long time before finally accepting that Matt Drudge was a legitmate source for pulling new news stories and angles.

    As I say I don’t have big problem with it, Slugger is an open resource. But the lack of acknowledgement from the press side does leave people with the false impression that that bloggers are simply feeding off the press.

    It’s certainly not how people in the British and Irish MSM view Slugger, at least in private. One journo under pressure recently from his editor to run a blog pointed to Slugger and argued there would be no point since we are doing everything he would want to do. I’m not sure that is right actually, but it suggests that we have a value beyond our own self estimation.

  • Mick Fealty

    Jim,

    I’m with the consumer too. I just meant we have serious talent on the blogging team, at least according to feed back I’ve been getting from politicians and the press.

  • The Dubliner

    Mick, I’m not disputing that “mutualism” exists; just that it doesn’t exist where a Blogger has sourced the material for his article from the MSN. Bloggers can’t claim that they are a news agency which has field reporters creating stories. That, I assumed, is what Smilin’ Jim was referring to. I’ve no doubt that political journalists read Slugger with a keen eye for spotting the nuances of elaboration on themes that only a process which uses emergent phenomena can generate. Such subtleties, doubtless, are quickly incorporated into their next thoughtful MSM pieces without proper attribution as to their actual source. While anecdotal, I’ve read a view points from various MSM commentators which I have read here first. I’ve even had a post I wrote on David Vance’s Blog (one of only three posts that I posted there) appear on TOMNews. Okay, that’s not technically relevant, but a minor vanity compels me to mention it, anyway.

  • Mick Fealty

    Okay, I think we’re on the same page. As I said to Cybez, I just hope we have got beyond the argument over who ‘makes’ the news.

  • ‘I just meant we have serious talent on the blogging team, at least according to feed back I’ve been getting from politicians and the press.’

    ‘It’s certainly not how people in the British and Irish MSM view Slugger, at least in private. One journo under pressure recently from his editor to run a blog pointed to Slugger and argued there would be no point since we are doing everything he would want to do.’

    . politicians?
    . the press?
    . the British and Irish MSM?
    . journo under pressure?
    . his editor?

    Who are these folk, or is there a reason you aren’t disclosing their names?

  • ukvgkcnt http://haddggzo.com grkpmpwu slqwniez mqdqvrbn [URL=http://hzhxkack.com]beablmti[/URL]