Posted by: kenziekat | January 16, 2010

Blogging, Bad for Journalism?

In general I don’t think, as my previous post stated, that blogging is bad for journalism itself. I do believe it may be detrimental to journalists and those aspiring to be journalists. Blogging opens a new, huge window into the field of journalism. Through the web any Average Joe can create and post news. Before blogging journalism required a degree or at least a job. Now neither a degree nor job is needed, only a computer, and perhaps a camera.

lThe last three years of my life have been spent acquiring a degree in Journalism/Broadcast News at West Virginia University. Countless dollars have been spent to obtain such a degree. All for nothing, because now, I could be reporting, video-taping, etc the news without a degree. I could be out on the field, out of school making a living as a journalist through blogging.

I predict ten years from now few ‘journalists’ will actually have a degree to prove it. And in some ways, I believe the common ways of getting news will die, and many important stories will be disregarded. Blogging allows the consumer to pick their news. Consumers no longer have to watch every reported story on the six o’clock newscasts to see who was arrested. Instead they can just find it on a private news/blogging site. With this, why would anyone need a degree or even a real job in a newsroom? Consumers of news may not need professional journalists to seek out the news once blogging gets fully underway.

Paul Andrews furthers my point; he says, “With the rise of the Internet, people don’t need to be bounded by those traditional filters anymore.” So not only can the new-age news consumer dismiss certain news stories, but the journalist’s role as a ‘gatekeeper’ has also been dimmed by the onset of the internet and blogs. No longer can certain news be kept out of the public eye by journalistic gatekeepers. Instead, Average Joe can tape whatever he wants and post it wherever he wants, whether the gatekeeper chooses to do so or not.

But, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. Again, as I stated in the previous post, the sole purpose of journalism is to inform the public. The more people informing, the more informed people will get. Journalists should learn to share as Rebecca MacKinnon points out.

The only true problem that I predict may arise is a loss in credibility. Because Average Joe can post whatever ‘news’ he wants, that news may be fake, made-up, or staged. Just as journalists have gotten in trouble over the years for lying or misconstruing certain events to the public, blogs may do the same. The difference is, bloggers (for the most part) are their own boss, and to date, there is little or no consequence for false information on the internet.

Credibility as well as the loss of the professional journalist are the two biggest problems I envision and blogging begins to take hold and the war between journalists and bloggers continue.



  1. […] Gabrielle Ash proposes that blogging is bad for the journalist, not for journalism. […]

  2. Interesting points. A question: You say “Countless dollars have been spent to obtain such a degree. All for nothing” and that, with the potential of blogging, why would anyone want to work in a newsroom. Yet despite blogging’s successes, a lot of its content is retransmitted from traditional news agencies. Is it too extreme to suggest that such traditional journalists will vanish in the face of blogging?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: