de.tech.ting

That’s what Nick Cohen suggests  in a happenstance companion piece to T/S Nancy Miller’s coverage of  a new fund supporting investigative reporting.

The best reason for wanting my colleagues to survive is that serious reporters and broadcasters offer a guarantee that what they say is true. If they stray, their editors impose journalistic standards and insist on objectivity. They may not have the best or fullest story or the most vivid account, but readers should be able to assume their work is reliable, while a blogger’s commitment to objectivity can never be assumed.

via Nick Cohen: Who would you rather trust – the BBC or a blogger? | Comment is free | The Observer.

Specifically, I take issue with this phrase:  “…a blogger’s commitment to objectivity can never be assumed.”  First of all, commitment to objectivity should never be assumed, period.  It suggests objectivity exists, which is a discussion unto itself.   But readers should be smart and sensible; they should interpret and question accordingly, whether they’re reading from a newspaper, a mobile phone or a Kindle.

Bloggers as a generalization?  That doesn’t fly anymore.  Blogging is a platform, like tv, radio and print.  It’s been a quick and energetic transition, from blogging  infancy to adolescence.  Bloggers  are no longer simplistically defined.   Just ask Andrew Sullivan.