Amateur Hour: Journalism without Journalists:: The New Yorker
There probably aren't going to be many posts on Zootennis that will cite New Yorker stories, but this one, by Nicholas Lemann, raises some very interesting issues about the rise of internet journalism, including blogs.
With the torrent of comments that have poured in lately, I've been thinking a lot about how to best handle them, and as you all certainly know, I have no way of verifying the identities of those commenting, nor am I able to determine what is fact and what is perception in these comments. Some good friends have begun to express reservations about what's going on with all these comments, and have warned me that the direction it is heading may drive away the valuable, reasonable readers, leaving only those who have a specific, personal agenda.
I have, from the start of Zootennis in January of 2005, refrained from gossip, innuendo and rumor; I confirm facts with sources before I publish and if I am voicing an opinion, I hope it is clearly understood to be that. I appreciate hearing from readers who know things I do not. The more information I'm exposed to, the better, as it will provide me knowledge that will lead to better reporting and writing. But ultimately, I need to take responsibility for what goes up on this site, and that means some comments will not get to the wider audience. I will read every one, but that is all I can promise.
If there is one part of the New Yorker article that resonated with me it was this:Reporting—meaning the tradition by which a member of a distinct occupational category gets to cross the usual bounds of geography and class, to go where important things are happening, to ask powerful people blunt and impertinent questions, and to report back, reliably and in plain language, to a general audience—is a distinctive, fairly recent invention. It probably started in the United States, in the mid-nineteenth century, long after the Founders wrote the First Amendment. It has spread—and it continues to spread—around the world. It is a powerful social tool, because it provides citizens with an independent source of information about the state and other holders of power. It sounds obvious, but reporting requires reporters. They don’t have to be priests or gatekeepers or even paid professionals; they just have to go out and do the work.
I intend to keep going out and doing the work, and I appreciate any help you can give me.
5 comments:
Colette...first of all, I really appreciate this site. Many interesting comments, and very entertaining at times as well. I'm not going to lie, I am not "steven s", and I would imagine many on this board are not who they say they are. I feel, epsecially with all the complaining that goes on toward the USTA (my Mother once told me, NEVER under any circumstances burn your bridges) that it would be foolish of us to put our names behind our OPINIONS. Even Mike DePalmer Jr with his rantings toward them..I just do not see any positives with dogging these guys, and letting them know who it was! Say what you want about them, but they have so much money, and so much influence, and POWER..Now, when you are getting personal (such as the attacks on the Harrison family)..then I do feel that names should be used, so people can properly defend themselves. Also am quite suspect on the posts from the junior players (authentic or not?). Not sure how you could enforce that, perhaps require a personal phone number to verify people that want to get so "personal"? I agree that in the last few days, things have taken a much more confrontational tone...but wouldnt this board become a bit boring if it was constantly a "love fest" all the time? Now that you know I am not who I say, you may not wish to post this..but in any case, again, I really enjoy this site, and many of the topics discussed!
Collette,
If there is one thing all blogs (our modern day version of the pamphlet) have in common it is that they represent, for better or worse, the voice of the author. Allowing comments from anonymous parties (yes, I realise I'm one of those) does increase the risk of diluting your voice and supplanting it with 'noise'. At the end of the day, if you can't hear your voice above the noise then it might be time to shut the doors, close the windows and allow yourself to be the only sound we hear.
The most important thing is the credibility of the blog. Feedback is nice but overrated and, too often, fuzzy, distorted and/or pointless (apologies to all the Hendrix and Greatful Dead fans).
Collette,
Your blog is so good and thank you for doing such an amazing job. I do not think you should censor the material as this is what makes it all interesting. Everyone has a right to their opinion and to write what they like. Readers understand the info sent make be suspect but this is freedom of speech and is of paramount importance in making your site the best it can be.
Colette, Our family reads your posts and benefits from information you provide which is not widely available. You always seemed too busy during the Kalamazoo Tournament to introduce ourselves, so we look forward to the future occasion. Keep up your good work for the sport. We enjoy it. Steve Jacobs, MD, Colorado Springs
Comments add a lot to the general direction and value of this blog. Go out and report, Colette, sure but keep the comments. For example, the discussion about the US Open wildcards was absolutely fascinating. Points about who should or should not have received entries can be debated endlessly. Nothing wrong with that. Who's in or out is going to raise heat. Especially if it involves subjective judgement. The hard thing for this blog is 'anonymous'. Make people write under their own names if they're going to make tough comments, especially about kids. Junior tennis can be very rough. You might lose a few comments, but it'd be worth it if commenters had to back their legitimate outspokeness with their identity.
Post a Comment