what is your view of BLOGGERS?

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

in general. not being specific.

 

[maxiep]

They're harmless.

 

[Nikolokolus]

Some blogs suck, some blogs are good ... as for trying to generalize about people who engage in "Web logging" that's a bit too broad to say anything. What are you really driving at?

 

[Minstrel]

My general impression are that the good ones are good and the bad ones are bad. The ones in between are of varying quality.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

Some blogs suck, some blogs are good ... as for trying to generalize about people who engage in "Web logging" that's a bit too broad to say anything. What are you really driving at?

not implying anything whatsoever. just wonder what people thought of bloggers. its purposefully vague in nature, so interpret as you will

 

[Nikolokolus]

not implying anything whatsoever. just wonder what people thought of bloggers. its purposefully vague in nature, so interpret as you will

Ah. Then like I said above some suck, some are good, lots in between ... and the range between "good" and "suck" is wide as the day is long.

 

[Natebishop3]

My opinion of blogging is that it's a double edged sword.

On the one hand, the internet and blogging has made information free flowing. It's very hard for the media or the government to censor us because we have this wonderful thing called the internet. So stories that would not have necessarily been reported are made available. A good example, if I had not been around during the the three years that I covered the team, you would have only gotten the negative journalism from the Oregonian. I tried to bring a more positive outlook on the team, and report things that the "O" was leaving alone. I also tried to give the full quote when the Oregonian would try to spin a comment from a player or coach a certain way.

It's kind of a check and balance.

On the other hand, the internet has so much free flowing info, it can be harmful. Internet rumors can be very destructive. Sometimes it's hard to tell what's true and what is made up. Anyone can log on and report anything. It's hard to separate the truths from the lies. It's the price we pay.

I just think it's funny because the Oregonian and other media outlets used to look down on me as a second-rate journalist because I worked for a website. Since then, the vast majority of Quick's work ends up on the web. Blogs, internet exclusive reports, and other things like audio and video has made the Oregonian a superior media outlet. Print journalism is slowly dying. It's a day late and a dollar short. I think in the future we'll see the complete end of print journalism.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I think they're great. People expressing their opinion and sometimes debating...

What I have noticed is that many bloggers are better then reporters.

 

[Денг Гордон]

I think they're great. People expressing their opinion and sometimes debating...

What I have noticed is that many bloggers are better then reporters.

I don't think this is necessarily true. The reporters have to write their stories for a mass audience, so they have to dumb it down, and just tell the general story, while on a blog, you are preaching to a niche audience, so you can go more in depth (also larger stories, because you are not limited by words).

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I don't think this is necessarily true. The reporters have to write their stories for a mass audience, so they have to dumb it down, and just tell the general story, while on a blog, you are preaching to a niche audience, so you can go more in depth (also larger stories, because you are not limited by words).

Maybe you haven't read the Portland media before. Terrible.