Some things I have noticed as a result of the previously discussed characteristics of the blog:
- many topics are ‘recycled’, and many are later ‘updated’, which makes it hard to keep track of what is happening on the site, but makes it easy for contributors to edit their posts without creating new ones. An example of this is a follow-up story about the Clintons and their riches, which seems to have been a popular topic, mentioned over a few days: ‘My superhuman task this morning; Update: The Clintons’ “unusual” tax returns’.
Photo taken from BBC Media ImagesThe posting is very typical of this site, as it mixes video content with the blogger’s own words. The blogger has obviously posted his opinions, received many comments, and was then able to update his post as soon as there was more information for him to write about. This increases the accuracy of his post for readers who may view it later, but makes it hard for other viewers to backtrack to his post in case of any updates. With the amount of posts each day, this is a major problem with blogs of this nature.
- Another thing which was not mentioned last time was the individual post descriptions, which provide an additional, short comment, which may or may not affect readership. I find that sometimes, they do not do anything for the article whatsoever, but that sometimes they offer a bit of humor/sarcasm/opinion before the reader actually gets to the article. Sometimes, they also respond to rhetorical questions which are given in the title of the posts, which adds to this idea of blogs being very opinionated. A lot of the time, however, you have to actually read the post before the descriptions make any sense.
In terms of the US election, there are still many frequent postings on this subject, from the trivial to the more serious, but almost always with a light approach. On April 5 there was a posting about namecalling in politics, and in particular, Obama acknowledging McCain as a ‘warmonger’.
- Another thing which was not mentioned last time was the individual post descriptions, which provide an additional, short comment, which may or may not affect readership. I find that sometimes, they do not do anything for the article whatsoever, but that sometimes they offer a bit of humor/sarcasm/opinion before the reader actually gets to the article. Sometimes, they also respond to rhetorical questions which are given in the title of the posts, which adds to this idea of blogs being very opinionated. A lot of the time, however, you have to actually read the post before the descriptions make any sense.
In terms of the US election, there are still many frequent postings on this subject, from the trivial to the more serious, but almost always with a light approach. On April 5 there was a posting about namecalling in politics, and in particular, Obama acknowledging McCain as a ‘warmonger’.
Photo taken from Double SpeakIn postings such as this, I am very impressed to see an attempt to balance opinions, as it can be so easy for people to just post their opinions and disregard all others.
In Ed Morrissey’s post: ‘Obama surrogate: McCain a “warmonger”; Update: McCain’s not a warmonger, says Obama camp’, though there is an opinion that Obama was calling McCain a warmonger, his update shows that in fact, Obama, though seemingly agreeing with the comment, did not actually say it. Morrissey then proceeded to state Obama’s opinion on the issue (even though it was given by his spokeswoman), which I felt added some credibility to his writing.
It can be argued that blogs are meant to be an individual's/group's opinions, and therefore, are allowed to be biased. But I think that though blogs are traditionally very opinionated outlets, it is nice to see some sort of an attempt at even-handedness by bloggers, and if anything, it makes the blog better.
It can be argued that blogs are meant to be an individual's/group's opinions, and therefore, are allowed to be biased. But I think that though blogs are traditionally very opinionated outlets, it is nice to see some sort of an attempt at even-handedness by bloggers, and if anything, it makes the blog better.
2 comments:
Some timely observations... it's interesting to note the role online journalism has played in shaping this presidential election!
The only reason why blogs are so biased is because of editorial control lies in the hands of the blogger. Although it is nice to see an "objective" blog post (another debate about objectivity in journalism) but blogs are opinions and opinions are one-sided. No body likes a fence sitting opinion writer. It would be a champion boxer that goes over to wrestling and then back and forth - just pick a damn sport! This is the case with opinions on the Internet. To be a successful blogger you have to be controversial and the only way to achieve this is to be outspoken, stubborn and opinionated. This is not a shot at Stephanie - it is a great post.
Post a Comment