Comments on: Why Christie Blatchford Won’t Blog

By: Jacki Hobbin

Jacki Hobbin — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 21:08:19 +0000

I’m in journalism school at the moment and I have to say I was appalled at the condescending tone Christie took over blooging.

Yes, it’s often a ramshackle affair when it comes to professionalism and commenters – but then journalism hasn’t always been the shining beacon of truth and facts either.

Ironically, I found another blog post about this that made some very valid points (and stirred up a bit of debate in the Comments box):

http://dannybrown.me/2008/10/04/the-dinosaur-and-the-journalist/

By: Parker Mason

Parker Mason — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:08:45 +0000

As someone else pointed out (maybe Chris Clarke), one of the first comments left by a reader on Blatchford’s article was “Great blog post!” or something to that effect.
I think she’s getting a little high and mighty, considering that she is working in an industry (print journalism) that many would consider to be dead and dying.

By: PRJack

PRJack — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 14:05:36 +0000

I ‘mostly’ agree with Blatch (and not because she is my dog’s ‘dogmother’!). I do believe that, for the most part, there is a schism in the quality of writing between a true journalist and your typical blogger. However, that’s kind of the point. Blogging is more a mean s of commentary than it is structured, artistic writing… and that’s o.k.! I think people read blogs to get commentary and insight in a non-formalized way.

Now it could be said that what we’re seeing here is the age-old separation of generations – status quo (older and established) vs. change (younger and seeking to carve out new niches).

The one thing that I do recognize in what Christie says is the part about how on-line discussions too often degenerate into poorly written statements of opinion presented as fact. We’ve all seen that… and it does indeed detract from truly thoughtful exchanges of ideas.

When you get down to it, if someone has a thought or an idea to share and they want to do that, then I say all the power to them for doing so. It’s just that I don’t try to hold them up to the standards of a professional writer. No different than saying sure I can drive a car, but I’m no Formula 1 or Rallye driver. This doesn’t mean that all bloggers are poor writers, it just means that you have to understand what you are ‘consuming’ and do so with an open mind.

By: Joseph Wilburn

Joseph Wilburn — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:48:11 +0000

I’m a bit late to this, but I did want to comment, Dave. I agree with Christie in that she portends to want to protect the “craft” of journalism. I think it’s laudable anytime someone wants to elevate their learning and take a leadership role in their field. However, when you take the overall article in context (and here’s where I disagree) I certainly smell overtones of hiding behind “professional” as wanting to protect hegemony over a rapidly changing industry. I am a blogger and proud of it. I do get out there and talk to people and do the best research I (personally) can before I post. Her article does a disservice to bloggers who do those things, as a journalist would.

Remember, it was “professionals” who drove Enron into the ground and the chaos that created. It was “professionals” who got too greedy and helped perpetuate the US mortgage crisis. I’m all for using professional in the right context, but Christie’s article doesn’t pass the sniff test at all.

By: Facilitating conversation in print and online

Facilitating conversation in print and online — Sat, 23 Aug 2008 15:25:27 +0000

[...] you, Dave Fleet, for drawing my attention Christie Blatchford’s comments on blogging and online [...]