Required Reading on Traditional Media's Abusive Relationship With Blogs

by Ziller on Jul 9, 2007 7:07 AM PDT in Meta

Matt Ufford wrote a tremendous piece on FanHouse re: recent traditional media gaffes relating to blog content. It was spurred by the ridiculously hilarious mistake SI's Ian Thomsen made, quoting an obvious/disclosed satire by Miss Gossip as fact without citing a source. In short, Thomsen stole a fake quote.

Ufford (who writes With Leather and is a hilarious chap in general) hits the mole on the head. Yes, the mole -- these constant reminders of media's blog xenophobia turn these otherwise talented reporters/writers into a laughable game. Fish in a barrel.

For the record, I've only been alluded to in the local paper -- Sam Amick paraphrased my joke without attribution. I didn't care terribly -- it wasn't that good a line, and Sam has been beyond kind/helpful/decent to me. I think Sam does a terrific job, and he 'gets' it more than most traditional reporters I've dealt with. But yeah... It shouldn't be considered courtesy to credit a source, it should be considered required. It is when you're pulling reportage from the Los Angeles Times... why wouldn't it be when you're pulling something from a blog?

</self import mode>

0 recs | Comment 7 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Back in the day

TZ, When I was majoring in journalism (back in the days of typewriters and carbon paper) the credo was get it right, get it fast. We were also taught to write straight news. Editorial opinion was saved for side bar columns. If you wanted to "slant" an article you better be able to do it via quoted and named sources.
With the advent of the Gulf War and CNN trumping the TV news community, a switch to get it fast, hope it's right began to take place. The change was completed with the creation of the internet (Thanks, Al Gore!).
Today, the lines are completely blurred, if not erased. ESPN does not have enough news to report? They go out and create news. Going to Jon Stewart or Bill O'Reilly for entertainment is one thing, but millions actually think that they are a source of straight news.
Thomsen's mistake was not "borrowing" from a reliable source. Kudos to Amick for at least having the good sense to "borrow" from a more credible and reliable source.
Bottom line, I think most of the folks that participate on this site view it as a better source of information than the Bee or any of the local news telecats. If someone "borrows" from you, see it as a compliment. The way most of these guys butcher the information it's probably better that they are not using your name.

by section214 on Jul 9, 2007 8:57 AM PDT 0 recs

Re: Required Reading on Traditional Media's Abusiv

I read the piece from both True Hoop, and Thomson, after Thomson issued the retraction. What a dope. But to be fair somebody either pointed it out to you TZ, or you noticed it yourself, because Henry did give you credit for pointing it out through email. So good work on that.

Traditional media and blogs won't get along for awhile. Traditional media guys are threated by blogs and blogs run off 'we aren't stupid like xxxx media group' this anti-establishment power. Just the way it is. Keep up the muckraking TZ!

I am the stone that the builder refused I am the visual, the inspiration That made Lady Sing the Blues..I'm the spark that makes your idea bright...

by pookeyguru on Jul 9, 2007 10:18 AM PDT 0 recs

Re: Required Reading on Traditional Media's Abusiv

He didn't issue a retraction. I had to email Thomsen's ED on Friday night to tell him what happened, and the ED took it out.

by KD on Jul 9, 2007 1:43 PM PDT 0 recs

Re: Required Reading on Traditional Media's Abusiv

Third post -- I should say, the ED's inbox was full of emails about it on Friday night. I wasn't the only one who pointed it out and my first post made it sound like that.

No more sugar for me.

by KD on Jul 9, 2007 1:46 PM PDT 0 recs

Re: Required Reading on Traditional Media's Abusiv

LAY DOWN THE LIPTON BRISK DAMMIT!

No, thanks for the inside insight. It's so bizarre how a news organization can exist as if it knows nothing about new media when one of its employees is the mainstream reporter most attuned to said new media.

by Ziller on Jul 9, 2007 1:50 PM PDT up 0 recs

Re: Required Reading on Traditional Media's Abusiv

Oh, and this retraction you speak of... the note at the bottom apologizing to Diddy/reader with no mention of Gossip, right? I didn't see anything else.

by Ziller on Jul 9, 2007 1:57 PM PDT up 0 recs