Blog Assassination
For all the attention blogs received in the past year and their inherent threat to the news conglomerates, is it any wonder that the mainstream media still isn't sure how to produce an evenhanded report examining any one aspect of them? Recently, blogs have again entered the national consciousness, as they did during the presidential campaign, with their dramatic reporting on the scene, call for donations for relief efforts, and hypothesizing on the causes of the devastating tsunami that is still dominating the headlines. However, as with most fanatical outlets, certain blogs have descended into what one could term the outer realms of conspiracy with partisan based attacks on the exact origins of the tsunami itself. The New York Times has an article in today's edition that "reports" on just this phenomenon.

To give the Times some credit they at least make an effort to balance out the critique with examples of how the process works for the best. The democratic, civilized manner, though, in which bloggers work in order to get the story right is a tad sentimental in its depiction, and one can sense that there's more than a little wild-eyed conspiracy mongering going on that doesn't get its full share of community-based editing. In other words, bloggers are depicted, at least in this article, as a tight-knit group that tries valiantly to make sure that they are taken seriously and that some few lone gunman don't ruin it for everybody. It's an odd form of socialist movement that's rarely seen anywhere else.

The mainstream media clearly still would like the bloggers to stay on the fringes. Fear of losing job security and missing the chance to break the big story because someone without press credentials breaks the story first seems to be the driving source of this subjectivity. What also troubles the media is that they have to hold up the democratic notion that everyone with the means to access the technology should be able to create a forum and add their voice to the masses already established, but this is at odds with their obvious fear that other people, again without press credentials, are sometimes doing the job better than they are. How can you reconcile that?