Journalists Must Only Use the Institutional Tools
Hugh Hewitt posted the transcript of his interview with Joseph Rago, author of “The Blog Mob, Written by fools to be read by imbeciles.”
The first line of questioning by Hugh Hewitt was regarding the definition of a journalist. Based on this definition by Rago, the main reason bloggers aren’t journalists is that they’re using some modern tool to create their art:
HH: Sure. What makes them journalists?So, journalists don’t have to have any special talent - no argument there! They do have to have sources, a beat, and some expertise on a topic.
JR: They…I think they cover events that go on on campus. They look into it closely. They have an opinion about it.
HH: And so the definition of journalism, so we can define some terms before we go into new versus old journalism is they cover events?
JR: Well, I mean, I think the best definition of journalism is history as refracted through the prism of the unfolding present. You know, you don’t…
HH: Is that what you were doing at the Dartmouth Review?
JR: Yeah, I think so. You know…
HH: Talent a lot better than the Crimson was in my day then, but go ahead (laughing).
JR: You know, hey, they’re amateur journalists, certainly.
HH: But journalists.
JR: Right. I don’t think it takes any sort of special talent to be a journalist. Well, that’s not right. I don’t think you have to go to J school, or anything like that. But I think to be a journalist, you have to have a certain seriousness, a comprehensiveness of what you cover, your beat. You have to have sources, and you have to develop a certain expertise on a topic.
HH: You have to have sources?
JR: I think so, certainly.
Rago then confuses the issue by indicating that there is a opinion journalism, and regular journalism:
HH:
Let’s go back, Joe, to the question on the NSA decision. Why is it not
crucial, and why isn’t it the best part of journalism to put the NSA
program into its appropriate legal context, bring to the public’s
attention the crucial facts around it, and to make sure that they
understand that there is a series of decisions affecting that? Why
isn’t that just as important as the raw announcement of a state secret?
JR: I think it’s just as important.
HH: So it is…it’s journalism.
JR: Yes.
HH: And it’s reportage.
Mr. Hewitt points out that there were new facts reported in the blog posts about the NSA story.JR: It’s opinion journalism.
Later, it comes out that what really impresses Mr. Rago about the Legacy Media is how much stuff they have:
JR:
I’m always open to the prospect that I’m wrong. I just don’t see an
argument supported by three or four people versus the entire apparatus
of the mainstream media. And I guess the other point is, I don’t think
that anybody would read my article and come away saying that the
mainstream media is infallible, or that it even always does a good job,
or even sometimes does a good job. The point, rather, was that the
institution, the way that they filter things, tends to increase
seriousness and expertise in the purveying of opinion and comment, and
I just don’t see that on the internet.
HH: Well, it sounds to me like you’re making the argument that
because the mainstream media spends a lot of money maintaining bureaus
in Iraq, they must therefore be doing good work.
God help the poor fool who thought he was a journalist but was the first to use a typewriter to record his thoughts and facts to report. And that new fangled telegraph thing…No way could that be reporting!JR: No, I don’t think that’s it at all. I’m saying that they have an
institutional support which vastly increases the professional reporting.
powered by performancing firefox
