“A blogger decides
for himself or herself. A journalist does not. A journalist, apart from being
put through a rigorous training in the discipline and skills, apart from that,
a journalist’s works are put through a system of checks to ensure that the
information disseminated is truthful, well contextualized and not malicious.
Bloggers don’t understand those things.”
I’m writing this
blog because of the blunt declarations of Mr VO Santos: About journalists: “A journalist’s
works are put through a system of checks...” And about bloggers: “Bloggers
don’t understand those things.” You are most unkind, Sir!
“A blogger decides
for himself or herself. A journalist does not.” Literally true! That is because
the blogger is self-employed; the journalist is employed by a group to whom his
works must be ascribed. A journalist has an editor; a blogger has probably only
himself.
“A journalist (is) put through a rigorous
training in the discipline and skills.” Ideally. A blogger has to train himself, as there are no schools for
blogging yet. I assure you – it’s not easy becoming a blogger, not to mention
remaining one!
“A journalist’s works are put through a system of
checks (and balances) to ensure that the information disseminated is truthful,
well contextualized and not malicious.” Ideally.
“Bloggers don’t understand those things.” Perhaps not!
Now then:
“A blogger decides
for himself or herself.” – I do declare the blogger is most free to explore a
topic or news, and that makes blogging the
most interesting medium of information dissemination in these modern times!
Like, either you help your readers understand something, or question it.
(I am willing to teach
the journalists to be bloggers too. One or two personal appearances may suffice
– the rest of interactions can be online. Once they learn the art & science
of blogging, the journalists may be hooked for life!)
“A journalist,
apart from being put through a rigorous training in the discipline and skills
...” Yes, but that doesn’t make her/him perfect, no.
“A journalist’s
works are put through a system of checks to ensure that the information
disseminated is truthful, well contextualized and not malicious.” That is, if
the system of checks is working. Of course, a journalist’s work is truthful –
but not necessarily well-contextualized and not necessarily not malicious!
Now I ask: “Why do
journalists sometimes become untruthful, not well-contextualized, and/or
malicious?”
Nobody’s perfect!
Mr VO Santos, if
journalists behave ideally as you seem to claim, why do we have journalists who
are targeted by some personalities? Because their stories have been hurtful,
not helpful!
I say now by way
of goodbye, rewriting Shakespeare:
“Blogging is such
sweet sorrow /
That I bid goodbye, till it be morrow!”@517
No comments:
Post a Comment