This post could also be called “Caleb attempts to address the current state of the gun world editorially without using words that rhyme with ‘truck’.” We don’t really talk about politics here at Gun Nuts, and in fact when I hire a new writer I warn them that bringing politics in to their posts is a surefire way to end up looking for a new place to write. That being said, the nice thing about being the owner of the website is that I can in fact talk politics if I want to; but to be honest I very rarely do.
However, I actually feel the need to address this whole ATF/Gunrunner thing. Obviously, other blogs have done a remarkable job covering it, and if you’re looking for information the linked post at Say Uncle is as good a place as any to start. Honestly however, the title of the post is accurate, because I don’t have any new information to add to the developing story. There was a part of me that didn’t believe it, at first. When people first started reporting this, the primary sources were mostly blogs that are associated with crazy people and Threepers (but I repeat myself).
But then it hit. And it hit big; although not as big as the Casey Anthony trial; and I also suppose the media doesn’t want to draw attention to the fact that the government is smuggling guns to Mexico. But regardless, it hit. And then I realized something that I’ve always sort of believe but hadn’t really hit home until this morning: the traditional media is dead. Sure, they’ll shamble on like some horrid zombie repeating the same old tired lines and phrases, and of course 2012 we’ll see them full on in the tank again for Obama, but when it comes to breaking the news and doing proper investigative reporting? Yeah, you’re not really seeing that from the traditional media.
Of course, that doesn’t mean that we as bloggers should now sit around and pat ourselves on the backs either. Because the problem is now that we’ve established that online media generators are the future, how do we forge that path forward into credibility? I’m not talking just about the gun blogosphere either, but rather the entire world of online media/journalism. Are bloggers the new investigative journalists? And a better question, or at least one that interests me is how do we collective put CNN out of its misery? I’ve got lots of questions, but not a lot of answers.
For years now, the old media has been trying to discredit the new media. My local newspaper has even jumped into this by professing that idiots with laptops are not journalists. Their reasoning was that a blogger is not formally trained and educated, blogs as a hobby, and does not publish physical media. All these reasons were, in plain English, a load of crap. Oh yeah, this local newspaper has seen a 20% decline in circulation in the last 3 years.
Old media is dying media. It’s best days are days past. You’d have to search far and wide to find someone under 30 who subscribes to a magazine or newspaper. All this shows us that new media is gaining a younger loyal market while old media has an aging and shrinking market.
Old media can continue to try and discredit and ridicule bloggers while they all ignore stories, stop digging, and lose market share. David Codrea, pick up and ran with a story that most of the bias old media refuse to look into.
“We don’t really talk about politics here at Gun Nuts, and in fact when I hire a new writer I warn them that bringing politics in to their posts is a surefire way to end up looking for a new place to write.”
So that’s another reason I continue to follow this blog. None of the gunblog conservative reach around. On that note, the whole MSM thing gets old as TV well sucks anyway. Even though most consider it “hippy radio”, NPR has covered the Mex./Guns story, ignored the Texas infanticide thing and we in the .mil appreciate that they are pretty much the only outlet that acknowledges that some of us are still at war.
I had a similar conversation with a friend, who is a reporter for the Detroit Free Press. He holds the opinion mentioned in Andy’s (the first Andy) post.
he believes that Blogger just are not the same because they lack the formal education to ask the right questions and approach the article in an ethical manner.
I countered that the Internet is a brutal, fast paced training ground. Commenters will set you on the straight in no time flat and that the learning curve is essentially, straight up. Bloggers are people that actually care about their subject, are more willing to research it and have a greater depth of knowledge.
He didn’t agree, but then he is fighting to keep his job.
Of course, Like many, I don’t reed the Free Press. I get all my information from Blogs (like this fine example) , where the writers are passionate about their subject.
One thing I’ve notice about professional media. First and foremost they’re professional media, meaning that they are rarely writing about something that they’re passionate about, knowledgeable about, or even care about.
Bloggers on the other hand, they write about what keeps them fired up. They write about what they know, and they do it with factual knowledge, practical insight, and experience.
Also I keep coming here due to the lack of politics.
The pluses of Blog media are also some of it’s weaknesses.
A truly good journalist comes at a story from a position of neutrality which is typically something that is missing from a Blog, which means that no matter what the information that is given is going to be slanted by opinion.
Places like NPR still try and push for that neutrality, the problem is that the mainstream media (MSNBC, CNN, Fox) has realized that if that if they cater their news to their audience then they will get a larger market share. People want to be told they are right in their beliefs and will get angry if anything opposes that (you can read the comments on a controversial subject if you want examples). The problem is that this has made people think this is the norm so when they go to Blogs for info they don’t mind that bias.
To me Blogs are more like OpEd pieces than standard journalism because they tend to weave the information into a pattern that fits what they believe. For example all most all of the blogs that I read about the “Operation Fast and Furious” deal have come from a position that the government was going to use these guns in Mexican hands to create a gun free state. While the info that they were basing this opinion on was correct, they took that info and added opinion and then presented it as fact and most blogs tend to do that in one way or another just like mainstream media does that to attract viewers.
To me the issue is going to be source information. Right now Blogs rely on the information chain of the internet where they repeat and carry on information posted to reliable blogs or news sources. The issue with that is confirmation of the item in question. At least in the old days of news the outlets would typically have a man (or woman) on the scene directly reporting what is happening at the moment to the news outlet. Now a days News outlets and bloggers get their info in very similar ways through info chains. For example if there was breaking news in the middle east a mainstream media’s chain would look something like this; Al Jezeera – AP – BBC – Fox (or what not) and you can tell this because the mainstream reporter will say “Sources say blah blah…” or “X news outlet reported today bleh bleh…” this lets them save money because they don’t have to maintain a reporter in each major news hub of the world, they just repeat a story reported by other news outlets. Blogs rely on blog chains that they feel are reliable in kind of the same way.
The issue is that it is getting harder and harder to confirm the true facts of a story because there are so many cut outs it is hard to find the man on the scene. Its like one big game of Telephone where you hope everyone is hearing everything right.
To me the only way we are going to get a true blog news source is if one site recruits bloggers in each major area of the world and has the money to pay them to go to each hot spot and report live what is happening that way there are less chances for there to be mistakes as the story moves from site to site. Kind of like an AP for the internet.
Anyway, sorry for the long rant, but I’m one of those people that always runs down info on the net because I want to hear it from the source and this has been something I’ve been thinking about for a while. =)
@Andy (not the other Andys)
I agree that blogs have a bias, but at least they’re open about it. Traditional media is largely slanted, but they like to act as if they’re balanced. I guess what I’m saying is that I at least know what I’m getting into when I go to read a gun blog.
“Places like NPR still try and push for that neutrality,”
Say what? NPR is about as far left as you can get.
As for the middle east, the first things that were shut off in Tunisia, Egypt, Iran, and Syria were social media. It was far to easy for them to control old media, but new media was a new problem. Suddenly you had a million people reporting the news one pic, post, and tweet at a time.
The only bias I see here is Caleb only writes about fast shooting pistols. Never any love for 600+ yards and slow shooting.
Oh My God – if the mainstream media is dead, we will have no where to go to obtain vital, important messages about hemorrhoid suppositories, laxatives, and adult diapers.
Seriously, the old media will never die until advertisers stop buying commercials from them. Until then, we will be treated to an unending series of Kasey Anthony stories, and other degenerate tales.
Craigslist has done more to kill the old print media than anyone else on the internet.