Blogs Will Not Replace the Media
Why do conservative bloggers continue to believe they will replace the media. Case in point is Jim Johnson. He explains how bloggers and Youtube will fill the void created by people like Rupert Murdoch buying up newspapers, television and radio stations.
You see, the power that Kelly, Kate, Robert, and I all have is the one thing the big media companies can not take away. As Big Media chases the almighty dollar, as they cut staff left and right, as their advertising revenue disappears to the Internet (thank you Google). As they fail to understand the changes around them. They will falter.
And people like Kelly, Kate, Robert, and I will be there to take their place. We can and will offer the world more voices, more choices. Big Media may hold tight to the dying media platforms. But technology has advanced to the point that anyone … and I do mean anyone… can join the ranks of the media.
Blogs. Podcasts. Vlogs. YouTube videos. And much more. These are the future of media. And there is virtually nothing that NewsCorp, ClearChannel, Entercom, Disney, NBC-Univesal, Viacom, or AOL Time Warner can do about it.
No one reads the bloggers Jim mentions. Kate does take time out to abuse her status as a teacher and publish emails from a parent.
No one reads blogs besides other bloggers. People need to get fresh sources of information. Very few bloggers are actually reporters. The media is imperfect, but still a vital source of information.
I touched on how the internet's influence is overrated. Go and read that post.
posted by Michael Hussey @ 1:38 AM
15 Comments
15 Comments:
Where are the conservative bloggers you speak of none of these people are conservative or speak for the republican party???? Please be more accurate and truthful with your posts.
Blogs can not replace the Media. They are a medium.
Remember, we are at the very beginning of the evolution of the media. People are getting a lot of their news, especially political news, from the Internet. Just read the State of the News Media report.
In my panel presentation, I won't be talking about small time bloggers like you and I, I will talk about Daily Kos, Huffington Post, Red State, Town Hall, Michelle Malkin, Boing Boing, Engadget, etc. etc. etc.
51 million Americans subscribe to newspapers. 57 million Americans read blogs.
The median age of network news viewers is 60. SIXTY!
Media General is laying people off and creating a new (bad, but new) content management system for its online local sites. Why? Because people are reading news online.
You can get podcasts on your TiVO. Apple TV will download videos to your television. (And why do you think you can get episodes of Lost on iTunes and watch past episodes of Heroes on NBC.com???)
Sorry, my friend, just because people don't read Out in Left Field does not mean blogs are dead.
In 1943, Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, said, "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." In 1958, Edward R. Murrow said, "This instrument can teach, it can illuminate; yes, and it can even inspire. But it can do so only to the extent that humans are determined to use it to those ends. Otherwise it is merely wires and lights in a box."
Thank you, Michael.
A huge attempt to pull the wool over peoples' eyes is attempted here in Tampa and nationally and probably internationally.
It's bullshit. The ride is almost over ---- .
There is a local guy buying up newspapers in Tampa ala Murdoch. This should be looked at because he also supports bloggers who really seem to be from the dark side.
I don't mind where people come from but when they try to assert their views OVER your own that's just WRONG.
Let the voice of highest power win by the laws of nature. hehe. Everyone listens to the smartest person. They know instinctively who that is. (yeah, they do)
I have friends going to the FCC dealie, too. Others I know are preparing to make the most of the two minutes ...
It's all bullshit, anyway. Why in the hell should the question even BE ASKED? Should one guy own all the newspapers? Oh yeah, that's a great idea. Snark. Ask George H.W. Bush. That's his plan for taking over with PNAC. That's all a matter of public record. Anyway ... this is a ridiculous farce and people came out in FORCE and objected to it. All over, so far. I even look at the locations as a joke. There are some extremely strange new people in Tampa these days and no doubt some of them are on these 'panels' which is WHY I immediately called for Jim to take this position and opportunity to speak for MEDIA DE-MONOPOLIZATION very seriously.
And, he should.
Jim !!!
Michelle MALKIN????
WTF????
Vox,
Sorry, I don't share such a conspiracy theory perspective. Remember, I'm a Republican and a capitalist. And since the rules are not about "monopolization" but rather "conglomeration," I have less concerns about that.
To be sure, I have an open mind and will be learning more from sources that oppose the rule changes (see my most recent post on State of Sunshine).
As for Ms. Malkin... a lot of people read her blog and watch her vlog. You may not like her, but she is an example of the future of the media.
Maybe when these bloggers start writing actual articles, which include being on the scene of a story and digging for facts, then I'll believe the hype.
Fact is that hardly any blogger out do work that reporters do because they don't have the resources. Even the more wealthy of bloggers -- those who have the most advertising revenue rolling in -- still run what's basically an editorial that's updated daily. The super-super majority of news bloggers merely comment on the news after reading it, from articles authored by reporters working for the very companies that Jim Johnson thinks will go out of business.
As for the comparison of 57 million blog readers compared to 51 million newspaper subscribers, I don't even know where to begin to describe the stupidity of this talking point. Does Jim Johnson realize a couple facts?:
- There are millions of blogs; indeed, using Johnson's numbers, each blog has an average number of just under 2 readers since there's over 50 million blogs. Some revolution
- There are only thousands of newspapers, so a few thousand publications garnering tens of millions of readers is still a big deal
Mysteriously missing from Jeff's arguments are the amounts of newspapers sold beyond subscriptions, how many people just get the Sunday paper, how many people choose to read their news from domestic and international mainstream sources online, etc. Then again, all of Johnson's arguments have been so simplistic that we can't bother with all of those pesky, mitigating complications, now can we?
Sure, there are online sources out there that are building themselves up and producing actual journalism (Raw Story is the first to come to my mind, though I'm biased there) (and no, Jim, Michelle Malkin is not an example; besides, she's going to jump ship to Fox "News" soon, and I doubt she'll be in the blogosphere a couple years from now), but are they or blogs going to overtake the media and newspapers become a thing of the past? When newspapers already have a history of reporting, actual reporters, sources, and a readership of millions?
Please. The arguments are so elementary at this point that going on with a debate of this nature is simply a waste of time.
LOL ! (sorry, if it's my first reaction I type it and I hope that you have read me enough to know it is not meant to be insulting.. (i just like to enjoy a good laugh)--- after I watch videos of michelle without sound (try it, it's HYSTERICAL it just caused me to laugh when you called her the future of anything .. she's a washup)
Jim there's more here to address but Anne Coulter and Michelle Malkin are cut from the same shrieky cloth. To call them media is an insult to any decent journalist ....
Oh, I don't ascribe to conspiracy theories. I DO think that anyone who blindly follows this current govmint or ANY 'dear leader' along is willingly taking America, my beloved America, in a terrible direction.
I do, therefore, ascribe to the truth. I come from a long line of people who mosied about with Presidents. And we wouldn't brag about it if it were the bushes.
I have also noticed that people throw 'conspiracy theory' at anything they are afraid of or can't explain away. Not saying that is the case with you. But people should be FIRST 'human' then 'american' and then whatever else they want to slot themselves out as.
Now on to this:
Main Entry: con·glom·er·a·tion
Pronunciation: k&n-"glä-m&-'rA-sh&n, "kän-
Function: noun
1 : the act of conglomerating : the state of being conglomerated
2 : something conglomerated : a mixed mass or collection
One entry found for monopolize.
Main Entry: mo·nop·o·lize
Pronunciation: m&-'nä-p&-"lIz
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -lized; -liz·ing
: to get a monopoly of : assume complete possession or control of monopolize a conversation
The first is part of the sum total of the second. Semantics.
Once something is 'conglomerated' it's then 'monopolized'. The two can't be separated.
(as in rupert owns my space and they would NOT accept 'stop big media's' ad against rupert..
that's conglomeration of a mixed collection of media which has already been monopolized. Or why would they not accept ad money? hmmm
The true idea of capitalism is a beautiful one. But, it's another word that has been spun into 'everything's hunky dory' if it's in the pursuit of capitalism.
The point where that stops being capitalistism is where it becomes criminal and not too many people seem to have enough integrity to control themselves instead of stepping on others by crossing that line of integrity.
I hope you make me proud on the panel. I happen to know there is no accident in the way these meetings are scheduled for these 'random areas' LOL and who is chosen for the panels. Of course, to judge, I would have to know who every person on every panel is. Then, it's easy to tell if it was done in a balanced fashion.
My guess? Nope.
Come ON, this is Tampa. Nothing is done correctly. Even naming baseball teams is a national embarrassment but really just a clever way to set the groundwork for the 'national embarrassment' of chads which allowed the supreme court to CHOOSE a prez. Ta-da. Dang, I'm getting good at getting all these 'conspiracies' in one sentence. (Did you hear about building 7?just doing an imitation of another poster to remain unnamed, ignore that last sentence -- it doesn't fit and doesn't belong here)
You do not have to address the last part or any part of this but the last part is just an illustration of how truth is called conspiracy when the government version of events is actually the conspiracy.
Just like the Resident is not actually the President. And all of that. The sad thing is that all this is really about is 'freedom'. People can't stand that other people have it. That must end.
We won't let it.
I think the median age of network news viewers has always been thus. I grew up watching the news with my Gram and Gramp, I was tiny ... And it wasn't as much bullshit as it is now. Chet and Dave are spinning in their graves ......
Goodnight and good luck and all of that.
Before long the rich people who think as humans will start another batch of newspapers and this will all get turned on it's ear. All this bullshit trying to control everything all for NOTHING.
Won't we EVER learn? Wait, won't 'those people' EVER learn?
Please do me proud. Please don't play semantics with the freedom of the American people to have some competition amongst news sources rather than the pablum of one or two well-placed guys against freedom.
That's the true picture.
oh, and tas is right.
The whole thing is an exercise in idiocy.
Why do I spend time on this?
It's rare so I forgive myself. Now, on with real life.
Finding out if Cheney is really sick or just hiding from lil ol dennis kucinich. what a wienie. just like the rest of em. big fat wienie who can't say no to himself. sorry. i'm tired of him throwing his health up whenever faced with a subpoena and of righties then poking fun at a woman diagonsed with cancer. sick.
Where are the conservative bloggers you speak of none of these people are conservative or speak for the republican party???? Please be more accurate and truthful with your posts.
The Pajamas Media crew are conservative and believe blogs will replace old media.
Rupert Murdoch uses his media empire to pump out talking points. That is not good for democracy. Fox News pretends to be an actual news organization. They ran the Kerry intern story and attempted to label Barack Obama as a Muslim extremist. This is why Democratic candidates are staying away from them.
Daily Kos, Huffington Post, Red State, Town Hall, Michelle Malkin, Boing Boing, Engadget, etc. etc. etc.
Atrios and Instapundit still drive both sides of the blogosphere conversation. What Duncan Black and Glenn Reynolds blog about matters. Even though they do nothing more than link.
Side note: they used to like each other back in 2002.
I used to like Duncan back in 2003 and 04, but he has a way of becoming a complete cock knocker, though. As for Reynolds, it's becoming clear that they only people who take his posts seriously are the criminally insane. He's so far out into la-la land that Instapundit.com makes for either an unintentional laugh riot or, when you remember that many on the right actually do take himm seriously, scary reading.
Oh --- also, I think lots and lots of people read blogs and blog-feeds. I get a lot of real-world feedback from my ethernet-musings. Of course, my situation is slightly unique. LOL !
But, I think bloggers are very powerful in the court of public opinion ... I notice when bloggers come out strongly, things change. Or the facade would suggest that, anyway.
I also grow weary of Republicans ALWAYS decrying the lack of interest in elections. They WISH. Yet Dems control the House and Senate. LOL !!
They stick to the spin but my crystal ball shows me reality. Or sumpin like that.
Vox wrote:Oh --- also, I think lots and lots of people read blogs and blog-feeds. I get a lot of real-world feedback from my ethernet-musings. Of course, my situation is slightly unique. LOL !
But, I think bloggers are very powerful in the court of public opinion ... I notice when bloggers come out strongly, things change.
Yes. That is exactly my point. There are a lot more blog readers than people realize... and as they become more ubiquitous... and as people learn how to use RSS feeds... and as newsrooms across the country fire people left and right... the Internet will be a place to get news. And many will be in the form of blogs - or whatever evolves out of blogs.
The times they are a changin'
aye but we can't allow this in any fashion. Not the collapse of unbiased news and media that is nationwide and etc. That leaves the internet as the source? Then the person who can afford the internet? What if the free internet resources dry up? We can't disallow people to have the chance to pick up the news for free and all the rest of the free press guarantees.
But, good try.
You and I can almost find agreement in many areas.
The time of the newspaper is not over. I covered this in my blog today.
tiny bit. sorry in a hurry.
How to tell when one loses an argument: when they come back to a thread where their talking points have been ripped to shreds, yet they neglect to address the person responsible for the destruction.
I knew i loved you.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home