Bryan of AWS has an interesting suggestion: compiling a list of the credentials of bloggers.
The reason I find this to be an interesting idea is that in some cases there is real exepertise in the Blogosphere, yet the MSM (on balance) tends to be dismissive of the entire enterprise (such as the now infamous Jonathan Klein quip about “Bloggers have no checks and balances . . . [it's] a guy sitting in his living room in his pajamas.”).
Bryan’s inspiration is the CBS Memo flap and the number of highly qualified individuals commenting on, and analyzing, the Rather docs (as compiled by Beldar).
Certainly there are many in the ranks of top bloggers who have better credentials than many of the talking heads on TV (or, at least as good)–and many, many have more specialized training and expertise than your typical reporter. As such, a list of credentials somewhere could be of use.
Sphere: Related Content
September 13th, 2004 at 3:35 pm
Actually, I’ve been thinking a bit about this in the context of military planning and intelligence analysis. Even those relatively insular groups possess a wide variety of experience and skills. The blogosphere is infinitely vast (at least compared with the military and intelligence communities) and contains a correspondingly greater abundance of expertise. The trick is registering, validating, and making use of the information one gathers about people without violating the principle that persons should be left alone and anonymous unless they specifically seek notoriety.
September 13th, 2004 at 9:41 pm
I take great exception to Mr. Klein’s comments. I’m usually in my dining room and nearly always wearing my sweats. Does mainstream media do no fact-checking these days?
September 13th, 2004 at 9:47 pm
Seriously though, Mr. Klein’s comments are simultaneously elitist and fatuous. The Constitution is mute on the credentials of journalists. There’s no more requirement for credentials to start a newspaper and become a real live journalist than there is for bloggers. All it takes is money.
And the first Amendment to the Constitution is quite specific in prohibiting government from establishing credentials for expressing an opinion. And that’s all a blog is, really. Somebody expressing his or her opinion.
The real issue is how much weight do you give whoever is expressing that opinion whether professional mainstream media journalist or blogger in his (or her) living room in his (or her) pajamas. Or less. And the more the mainstream media whine about joggers and the more they sound like Baghdad Bob the less weight they’ll be accorded. I say come on in, guys, the water’s fine!
September 13th, 2004 at 9:48 pm
Make that “bloggers” rather than “joggers”.
September 14th, 2004 at 9:20 am
By “credentialiny” I meant noting their credentials (attorneys, profs, etc.)
September 14th, 2004 at 9:24 am
Are journalists credentialed in this fashion? A quick check of my newspaper suggests otherwise.
September 14th, 2004 at 9:26 am
No, they’re not. I think you are misundertanding my point. All I am saying is that it would be nice if there was a central list of the expertise of bloggers, as it would lend legitimacy. Indeed, the point is that bloggers often have far, far greater expertise than do the reporters who dismiss them.
September 14th, 2004 at 9:30 am
In other words: the point is that bloggers often have credentials that are ignored by the press.
September 14th, 2004 at 9:56 am
Go Pinky!
Well, it isn’t exactly a line with the staying power of ,”a day that will live in infamy”, but the…
September 14th, 2004 at 11:39 am
I’ve seen often in my life “phd”s selling things way outside the confines of where there phd was in. Or to be blunt, I think that a person with a phd in chemistry is probably about as qualified to comment on national defense as I am (read not). Credentials are a two-edged sword.
Still, standing within a community outside the blogosphere is useful information to know.
September 14th, 2004 at 11:40 am
Note that based on my last comment, I am not qualified to comment on anything regarding spelling or grammar.