|
The Occasional Muse
My humble opinion on current events
July 27, 2003
Only Democrats are
Bloggers
Joanna Weiss of the Boston Globe has
suddenly discovered the world of Internet blogging. Stop the presses! What
a scoop!
Her story, Blogs
Shake the Political Discourse, was first printed July 23rd, and
appeared in my local rag today. When I saw the headline, I thought it was
a story about the dozens upon dozens of blogs run by individuals,
magazines, and organizations that comment on political affairs. That's
what I get for thinking.
Instead, Weiss limits the discussion to a
few bloggers supporting Democrat Howard Dean for president. Of the seven
individuals quoted in the story, six are Dean supporters:
- Oliver Willis "posted an
essay" on his web site "promoting" Dean
- Jock Gill is a "new-media
consultant" working for Dean
- Ron Schmidt is a "Dean
supporter" from Minnesota
- Anna Brosovic "co-runs a blog
called Dean Nation"
- Charles Donefer "helps with the
Dean Nation blog"
- Rick Klau is a "Dean blogger"
To add balance, Weiss quotes - who else? -
Joe Trippi, Howard Dean's campaign manager. She also grudgingly
admits, deep into the story, that other blogs support Democrats John
Kerry, Richard Gephardt, Dennis Kucinich, and - gasp - President
Dubya.
So, after reading this love letter to
Howard Dean masquerading as an impartial news story, a reasonable person
could conclude that blogs exist to promote Howard Dean, and only Democrats
write blogs (with a few wackos plugging President Dubya).
This is not a story about blogs shaking up
political discourse - it's about blogs supporting Howard Dean. Apparently,
Weiss is either unconcerned or unaware that the blogging phenomena has
been going strong for the last half-dozen years or so, and did not begin
when Howard Dean began running for president. She's so busy gushing over
Dean that she overlooks all the excellent blogs that pre-dated Howard
Dean's campaign, like those run by magazines (National Review's The
Corner, in my opinion the best blog on the Internet, Reason's Hit
& Run, and the very lame Tapped
by the American Prospect) and individuals (Andrew
Sullivan, Mickey Kaus, Glenn
Reynolds, to name a few). There's even blogs dedicated to debunking The
New York Times and its columnist Paul Krugman (see here
and here for
excellent examples).
This story is a fine demonstration of
everything that's wrong with the media. It's blatantly biased toward a
liberal Democrat, and it's lazy (couldn't she have bothered to speak with,
say, John Kerry or Dick Gephardt bloggers?). I recently read an
interesting book called Breaking
the News, by James Fallows. I didn't mention this in my review,
but he complains that reporters often allow politicians to set their
agendas and make trends. Ms. Weiss waited until Howard Dean's campaign started
a blog before writing about blogs, though blogs have been around
forever (in Internet time).
Despite its many faults, the story does
make some interesting points. Blog proponents, Weiss writes, claim that
blogs "are harbingers of a new, interactive culture that will change
the way democracy works, turning voters into active participants rather
than passive consumers, limiting the traditional media's role as
gatekeeper, and giving the rank-and-file voter unparalleled
influence."
To varying degrees, that is all true. Blogs
are influential, pervasive, and not only limit the media's role, but
critique the mainstream press and keep it honest. More folks are reading
blogs for their news rather than watching the network news broadcasts or
reading their newspapers. Blogs are here to stay and will continue to
grow.
However, there are "some
skeptics" who "question whether every supporter's passing
thought deserves a public platform, or whether the musings of an almost
anonymous voter are worth reading."
The arrogance behind these criticisms is
incredible. What "the skeptics" are really saying is that
regular schmucks like me don't deserve a "public platform."
Political commentary should be restricted to the professionals, like the
talking eggheads on TV, pontificating pundits in the newspapers, and
elitist intellectuals in colleges and universities. Undoubtedly, these
same skeptics also whine that folks aren't interested in politics and
should become more involved. Well, here's a cheap, easy way for folks to
get involved. The question isn't whether bloggers "deserve" a
"public platform," it's why shouldn't they have their own
public platform. Bloggers don't impose their views on anyone - what's the
harm? Besides, most bloggers pay for their own URLs and server space -
they're not asking for handouts or freebies.
Perhaps Joanna Weiss could write a
follow-up story about the power of bloggers to rein in the traditional
media and steal its audience - provided she can remove her lips from
Howard Dean's backside.

|