...it's not dark yet, but it's gettin' there...
Amazing. CNN and Larry King just broadcast the tepid beginning of Michael Steele's speech before the RNC. And (so predictable it shouldn't surprise me) when he got into the middle of his speech and started to hammer on Kerry's record, CNN cut to a floor reporter who had nothing to say.
Yet there's no media bias.
CNN is pulling their oar on the Kerry rowboat with such incredible enthusiasm, they don't even notice that the boat's sinking. And it's taking them with it as it goes down.
In this vein, please, please read Professor Reynold's latest Tech Central Station column, if you are at all interested in the impact of blogging and the new media. i think he hits the nail right on the head.
The rise of the blogosphere is revealing the old media as an emperor with no clothes, which must get its act together or be crushed. Professional journalists are lazy, uneducated hacks, as i've said so many times before. When they have to compete with superb "amateurs" like Reynolds, Volokh, Hinderaker et al., Hewitt, Ed Morrissey, Wretchard, etc.* they can only lose.
Professional journalists simply can't match the top bloggers' ability to research and articulate the news at the speed of light. In the world of the new media, amateurs produce like professionals and the professionals are exposed as amateurs.
Reynolds quotes Hinderaker:
A bunch of amateurs, no matter how smart and enthusiastic, could never outperform professional neurosurgeons, because they lack the specialized training and experience necessary for that field. But what qualifications, exactly, does it take to be a journalist? What can they do that we can't? Nothing. Generally speaking, they don't know any more about primary data and raw sources of information than we do-- often less. Their general knowledge is often inadequate. Their superior resources should allow them to carry out investigations far beyond what we amateurs can do. But the reality is that the mainstream media rarely use those resources. Too many journalists are bored, biased and lazy.Hack reporters are helpless to fix their own deficiencies, they don't have the brainpower or common sense, nor do they seem to care. They will have to adapt to the new media or wither away, and i'm actually not sure which eventuality i prefer more.
Who would you trust more to give you the right answer? Four million randomly chosen people, or your buddies in the newsroom who were all chosen because the boss likes the way they think? The blogosphere has the characteristics of wise crowds, as set down by James Surowiecki:Link via Instapundit.
Even if the mainstream media weren’t ingrown and biased, you would find that the blogs win – always.
- Divesity of opinion – each person should have some private information, even if it’s just an eccentric interpretation of the facts.
- Independence – people’s opinions are not determined by the opinions of those around them.
- Decentralization – people are able to specialize and draw on local knowledge.
- Aggregation – some mechanism exists for turning private judgments into collective decision.
* Yes, in spite of his few successes, i most intentionally omitted Andruw Sullivan, who is an intellectually dishonest, self-promoting shill.