The common feeling from those who have embraced the new media is that they don’t trust the MSM, claiming its “agenda driven”.

Yet they willingly trust anything that comes from bloggers, simply because it comes from bloggers who, for the most part, happen to be saying what they want to hear.

Why should I trust any blogger simply because he doesn’t belong to the MSM?? There are just as many high profile bloggers who are as agenda driven as journalists in the MSM.

The most prevalent complaint from conservative bloggers and their readership is about the unfair unbalanced negative reporting by the MSM on the war in Iraq.

So why is it that these voices don’t seem to take issue with bloggers who go to Iraq and only write about the good news? Or take issue with bloggers who have never been to Iraq, and only present one side of the story, albeit the more positive side? How is writing only about the good news any more honest or fair or objective than what comes from the MSM?

And if one embraces that lack of objectivity from bloggers, than how can one complain about that same lack of objectivity from some journalists in the MSM? Read John Burns. That man has the best understanding of the complexity of our situation in Iraq; better than anyone in both the New and Old Media. Yet he is almost always dismissed by conservative bloggers because he works for the NY Times, and by liberal bloggers because the NY Times originally supported the Presidents decision to go to war.

Brian has a blog and he doesn’t disdain all bloggers—-he speaks very highly of Michael Yon:

”

At a later date, I plan to share some residual notes from our travels in Iraq — including some recommended reading. One link that cannot wait another day is the blog of Michael Yon. Michael is a Special Forces veteran who is now a unilateral embedded journalist. His dispatches are the most true-to-life that I’ve ever encountered — raw writing from the soldier’s point of view. He is best-known for one in particular, called Gates of Fire, a gripping account of a firefight that required him to briefly revert from journalist back to soldier in order to save American lives. I had the pleasure of getting to know him on this trip, and it is easy to see why he enjoys near-rock-star status among members of the military, both active and retired.”

“His dispatches are the most true to life.” It s true – they are. But I suspect that what Brian also appreciates is that Mike reports the good, bad and ugly. If that is fundamentally what we expect from all journalists in a war zone, then why should we expect and/or embrace anything less from bloggers in a war zone?

Someone once wrote that if sunlight is truly the best disinfectant, getting the truth out can never be a bad course of action. I have no doubt that is yet another reason that Brian Williams embraces Mike Yon’s blog. Keeping the Military honest and their moral compass on course is truly a noble cause, and one that Mike has embraced. Likewise keeping the old media honest and their moral compass on course was a noble cause that the new media elites had embraced, but, sadly, they seem to have dropped the ball when it comes to what’s going on in their own backyard.

But then I look at this Feb. 2003 conclusion by the US Army War College

I actually read it at the time it was released online. There are few better sources for war planning scenarios available to the general public.

I am not aware of this info being cited by any mainstream media outlet. Definitely not prior to the invasion. If presented at all – certainly not frequently.

Nor are you aware of it being cited or promoted on any blog at the time for the simple fact it wasn’t. I couldn’t find anyone who had read it in early 2004 when the wheels really fell off and the scenarios analysed in this brief became relevant.

The fact that the info supporting the alternative emphasis may or may not be available on Yahoo or whatever is irrelevant.
Comment by Triumph — April 13, 2007 @ 11:58 am

Well no it’s not irrelevant, since you just spent a bit of time telling us it was relevant that this analysis was missing from MSM coverage pre-war and post-invasion.

But at the same time it is just as relevant that it was just as missing from blogs coverage at the time. That relevance being that you were supposed to be distinguishing bloggers from journalists and you didn’t.

So, like I said, this contribution of bloggers which overwhelmingly consists of nothing more than having the MSM dictate what stories they cover, then quoting small portions of MSM articles real journalists have produced themselves, while contributing nothing more than throwing in an opinion isn’t exactly much, if anything at all.

And FYI, if you wanted to pick an issue where there isn’t even the slightest chance of any competition between bloggers and journalists, war is that issue.

If you don’t believe that’s correct lets hear 3 cheers for Michelle Malkin’s belated 2007 trip to Iraq in representing the entire blogosphere’s contribution of original reporting to date on Iraq.
Didn’t think so.

Actually, first it was Spartacus, then it was Atrios, now it’s Vinnie.

I am Vinnie.

Get it, Brian???

Or are you just too damn credentialed to know WTF I’m talking about?

Cheers,

RK Jones

By Kilo

In part, yes. Like this one.

“You (bloggers) were named Time magazine “Person of the Year” on Saturday for the explosive growth and influence of user-generated Internet content such as blogs, video-file sharing site YouTube and social network MySpace.

“For seizing the reins of the global media, for founding and framing the new digital democracy, for working for nothing and beating the pros at their own game, Time’s Person of the Year for 2006 is you,” the magazine’s Lev Grossman wrote.

And yes, again. Like this.

Brian Williams, “Does a violent weekend make an Iraq quagmire?” Reuters (former Yahoo! link), September 23, 2003: “No one knows as yet and it took years for the United States to fully realise their predicament in Vietnam.

But then I look at this Feb. 2003 conclusion by the US Army War College – “An exit strategy (from Iraq) will require the establishment of political stability, which will be difficult to achieve given Iraq’s fragmented population, weak political institutions, and propensity for rule by violence.”

I am not aware of this info being cited by any mainstream media outlet. Definitely not prior to the invasion. If presented at all – certainly not frequently.

So I am asking myself – why is Williams still asking rhetorical questions about quagmire in September of 2003? Why not a sound bite like this?

“Prior to the invasion, the US Army War College – among others – cited concern that a successful exit strategy from Iraq may be difficult to achieve. Could this violent weekend be a sign that their concerns were well founded? ”

MSM outlets like William’s NBC News make editorial decisions on emphasis. There are some that feel this emphasis is sometimes politically biased. There are some who feel that the emphasis is ruled by the ratings game. There are some that feel that the emphasis is the result of lazy incompetence.

Bloggers offer an alternative to the editorial decisions made by the MSM in terms of emphasis.

Prior to the Iraq invasion – the MSM emphasis was on “being greeted as liberators.” Clearly a ridiculous emphasis – not only in hindsight, but also at the time to anyone that did research. The fact that the info supporting the alternative emphasis may or may not be available on Yahoo or whatever is irrelevant.

Maybe if you tried being a journalist instead of a shill you wouldnt need to worry about a guy who gets more done in his bathrobe than you do with your “Credentials”. Hack.
Comment by Vance — April 12, 2007 @ 5:28 pm

What exactly is it you think bloggers “get done” ?

You mean quote portions of media articles — that anyone who loads yahoo news can read already — that actual journalists have investigated, researched and reported and then express an opinion about it before giving a “hat tip” to another blogger who already wrote about the same thing 40,000 other bloggers did ?

Go have a look at memeorandum, or technorati or a google blogs search for a common verb. See how much bloggers are contributing that doesn’t involve lifting from MSM journalists.

—————————-
“I think Rush has actually yet to get the credit he is due because his audience for so many years felt they were in the wilderness of this country,” Williams told C-SPAN interviewer Brian Lamb in December 2004.

“I think Rush gave birth to the Fox news channel. I think Rush helped to give birth to a movement. I think he played his part in the [Republican] Contract with America. So I hope he gets his due as a broadcaster.”

Williams added that when he worked in the White House press room, he would join with his “friend Brit Hume,” now a Fox News anchor, in citing alleged examples of liberal bias by “you members of the perhaps unintentionally liberal media.” [C-SPAN's Q&A, Dec. 26, 2004]

Having come of age in a Washington media environment where flattering the Right was a guaranteed way to protect your career, Williams understands that he helps himself by siding with conservative media figures.

—————————-

Don’t worry about “what I have not been reading as a result of the internet,” Brian.

I have read:

A report from the U.S. Army War College.
The conclusions on page 7 of 84 were particularly prescient.

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB182.pdf

An interview of an exiled Shia Iraqi Ayatollah/Militia leader prior to the invasion conducted by PBS. Interesting how his thoughts proved to be accurate as well.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/iraq/resistance_2-25.html

I’ve been reading the thoughts of Norman Schwarzkopf. This guy’s concerns proved to be relevant …

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A52450-2003Jan27?language=printer

Gee … what else … The Future of Iraq Project. That highly accurate work that Iraq expert Tom Warrick oversaw. The one the president ignored …

Fiasco – by Thomas Ricks.

State of Denial – Bob Woodward.

You know, stuff that you – Brian Williams – should probably read. Stuff like that.

Okay off to search the net for entertainment. Maybe YouTube has a video of a cat flushing a certain news anchor down the toilet …

What, it took him his whole life to get his teeth straightened and grow a head full of blow-dried hair?

Hard work, that.

Indeed Mr. Williams, WHAT great story are we ignoring? I suspect that the problem is that Mr. Williams thinks that this about a “story”, instead of trying to find the truth.

If not for the blogosphere, I wonder if ANY of the lies of the past six years would have gotten out.

…

…oh sorry wrong internet :(

Plus, they don’t have the shitty attitude either, something Mr. Williams needs to rid himself of… quickly. What a maroon.