An item by Steve Hewlett on the BBC’s Today programme – admittedly not particularly easy listening given a convoluted writing style and constant background voiceover – did clarify some thoughts regarding journalists and online information. The Today intro describing online radio as a “threat” and Hewlett (tongue in cheek I hope) believed that online news items gaining the greatest hits are those most desired by the “great unwashed”. I had to chuckle at the implication that only network news providers are the true filters of news with gravitas, and that they alone are leading the crusade to educate the masses. And in reality – a serious point made by the item – where is popular news now being sourced?
Native Edge’s Andrew Arnold picked up an interesting blog on research by US Comms agency Brodeur on the use of blogs by journalists as a source of information. Jerry Johnson, Brodeur’s Exec VP who lead the research, has also received considerable comment on the stats after they were revealed at a conference.
In my own recent blog about objectivity I talked about journalists writing their own blogs – possibly under a degree of coercion from over-eager editors. What is certainly clear from this research is that journalists see the blogosphere as a vital source of information – certainly in North America – and I have little doubt that this is the case in the UK. Call it lazy journalism or just plain commonsense, but the research showed that more than 78% of journos saw bogs as a source of stories and angles, with nearly as many using blogs as a way of testing the tone of discussions on a subject. Interestingly nearly half also viewed blogs as a source of breaking news. Disturbingly, perhaps, one third saw blogs as a way of identifying and validating news sources. If this is true, then it would appear that journalists are standing up their stories based on an online persona. Certainly there are a significant number of bloggers with long and established reputations. But the thought of John Humphrys, logging on, bleary eyed to check his sources with Strumpette does add a certain frisson to the morning!
Thanks for the post. You should know that I received some interesting personal commentary from several of the journalists that received our email invitation. A few thought (rightfully, I’ll admit) that I didn’t sufficiently define what “blog” meant. For example, can things like Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Gizmodo, and TechCrunch really be considered blogs. I’d argue not in the traditional sense (i.e. they are not a “web log” of an individual). Rather they’re an electronic news/entertainment/commentary site. Others thought the whole survey was a bit silly and mildly insulting. I was frankly a bit surprised at the percentages of journalists who confessed to using blogs to help shape a story. But I interpret much of that as being journalistic “ethnographic” research as anything else. Something that I would find to be very legitimate given the amount of time people over fifty (like me) as well as those under twenty five (like my children) spend online.
Best,
Jerry Johnson