Comments on: Guilty by association

By: Dan Blank: Publishing, Innovation and the Web » Blog Archive » Discovering the Balance: Social Media and Marketing

Sun, 10 Sep 2006 16:47:59 +0000

[...] And a similar issue: [...]

By: BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » The new sin

BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » The new sin — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 11:34:29 +0000

[...] In the old days, journalists were canned for a few too-frequently committed sins: lying, plagiarism, fudging the expense account. It’s amazing how many have now found the new sin of sock-puppetry. I’ve said before that this comes out of some fear of facing people eye-to-eye, to have opinions and to state them like any normal human being. So there is this strange instinct to hide behind a fake identity just because other people do it online. In the end, it’s just another form of lying. [...]

By: BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » Gray ladies

BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » Gray ladies — Wed, 26 Apr 2006 11:51:13 +0000

[...] In the journalism blog at the Handelsblatt (Germany’s Wall Strasse Journal), KnÃ¼we continues the discussion about Michael Hiltzik’s nom de snarks, newspaper blogs, transparency, and the reason why journalists have such a problem having open discussions with their readers. I don’t have my German dictionary with me, so I’ll paraphrase rather than translate what he says: Perhaps this is a reason why so many blogs by professional journalists are so gray and dull: They don’t want to take fire for their opinions. In a paper, this is easy. One writes an article and gets perhaps angry calls and two or three letters and that’s that. In TV, the hotline takes the criticism; ditto radio. [...]

By: Manuel L. Quezon III » Pushing the envelope

Manuel L. Quezon III » Pushing the envelope — Wed, 26 Apr 2006 04:04:57 +0000

[...] A series of highly interesting entries on blogging: big mango with an overview, an analysis, and a summation, on the purposes served by blogs in public and political discourse in the Philippines: specifically, their role in constructing solutions for a troubled country (ours). Via Barako Cafe: from BuzzMachine, Guilt by association (continuing newspaper hostility to blogs) and Press in peace (do we need newspapers? Specifically, newspapers on paper?); and kottke.org on there being two kinds of bloggers: “referential and experiential” - [...]

By: Tish Grier

Tish Grier — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 13:19:09 +0000

I’ve been alternately laughing and shaking my head at this whole thing since friday.

It’s a matter of Hiltzik not knowing a*thing* about the blogosphere from personal experience, having his own prejudices about it (*everybody* uses pseudonymns), and then thinking that somebody wouldn’t ferrit out his ruse.

What a dope. As dopey as the Wal-Mart bloggers. As dopey as “Clooneygate.”

Apparently, there’s a whole lot of dopeyness going around.

As others have said, it’s not the medium, it’s the user. In Hiltzik’s case, someone should have given him a copy of “Blogging for Dummies” before they set him loose in the blogosphere. I blame the L.A. Times for the oversight.

By: Barako CafÃ© » Blog Archive » Internet vs. paper debate

Barako CafÃ© » Blog Archive » Internet vs. paper debate — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 02:43:55 +0000

[...] BuzzMachine posts notes on two related internet issues in the U.S.: blogs versus journalists and the virtual vs. paper. [...]

By: Kevin Peters

Kevin Peters — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:30:04 +0000

The L.A. Times ethic’s code states that the use of psuedonyms by their writers on other blogs and on their own blogs is unethical. They already have the standards, Hiltzik just ignored them. The L.A. Times has , especially Tim Rutten, has been on a Jihad against the blogosphere for a couple of years. Hiltzik is trying to narrow the debate about his actioons strictly around the use of pseudonyms. When Patterico first challenged Hiltzik about his actions he was very, very, clear that the issue wasn’t about pseudonyms, it was about Hiltzik deceiving his readers, pseudoynms was just the tool he used to do it. I don’t use them but I understand why some people do and many of them don’t use them to lie.

The fact that the MSM sends one of their most respected writers out into the blogosphere and that this “journalist” acts in an unethical manner says nothing about blogs. Hiltzik’s response to Patterico speaks volumes about the MSM. Patterico went after Hiltzik hard but the one thing he did not attack Hiltzik for was the use of pseudonyms. How did Hiltzik respond? By creating a strawman argument about pseudinyms, the one thing that Frey did not go after him for. He even had the gall to charge Frey with hypocrisy for using pseudonyms himself. Hiltzik tried to deceive his readers. Patterico called him on it. Hiltzik defends himself by misrepresenting Frey’s argument and not responding to what Frey accused him of. This is classic MSM tactics. Blogs are not the issue. Personel integrity is.

By: Diane Ensey

Diane Ensey — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 15:31:33 +0000

I think the bigger picture is the lack of rules about blogging for and about your employer and employment. I don’t think blogging should be banned, but at what point does shooting your mouth off about how bad your company is become unacceptable? When I worked in the legal field we were expressly allowed to gripe all we wanted as long in public places (restaurants, etc) as long as names and other identifying information was left out. Since this was in a fairly small city, this meant we griped in fairly general terms.

By: jeremy in NYC

jeremy in NYC — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 15:19:24 +0000

Yeah, what Jim said. The idea was good, but you don’t want to hand the expensive equipment over to a sock puppet.

By: CaptiousNut

CaptiousNut — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 15:10:08 +0000

The hypocrisy/irony never ends. The self-styled vanguards of freedom of speech muzzle their own journalists.

$24.29 per share, NYT’s stock on sale at an 8.5 year low.

By: Gutenberg

Gutenberg — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 14:11:21 +0000

Well, reporters talking on radio and TV is a problem, too (see Okrent’s column from last year about The Times’ take on it: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/06/weekinreview/06bott.html). The fact is that reporters should restrain themselves in forums outside the news columns. This hadn’t been much of a problem, given that a number of early bloggers were critics, columnists, or other official opinionistas. But now that every City Hall, school board, and other reporter is blogging, newsrooms do need to make sure the line isn’t crossed. I’d like to think that quality control (in addition to access and resources) is what separates print from most bloggers. Most newsroom have codified their ethical guidelines — does Jarvis suggest throwing those to the wind or a completely different set of standards for on-line discourse? Seems schizo, at best.

By: Benoit Beauchamp

Benoit Beauchamp — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 13:57:42 +0000

I would love to see a couple of editors following a journalist for a few days. Im sure he’ll be able to tell stories from then on about his personal life if he thinks that weblog only serve that purpose.

By: Michelle Castle

Michelle Castle — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 12:38:20 +0000

Michael Hiltzik’s (the reporter\blogger) description of a journalistic blog as nothing more than “an unfiltered online diary” reveals his own misconceptions about the medium and its uses.

By: Rob Hyndman

Rob Hyndman — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 11:57:17 +0000

Reporters in bars?!?!?! Perish the thought

By: Jim Treacher

Jim Treacher — Mon, 24 Apr 2006 11:36:17 +0000

Yeah, the experiment didn’t backfire so much as their choice of lab technicians.