Why would journalists embrace/eschew blogging?
December 8, 2005 9:28 AM Subscribe
Professional journalists having blogs associated with their names - Cost/benefit analysis.
How might they help, how might they hinder? Personal experience, second-hand experience, and wild irresponsible supposition are welcome. If you think the answer changes depending on whether they're a columnist, a freelancer, or Hunter S. Thompson, answer for all.
How might they help, how might they hinder? Personal experience, second-hand experience, and wild irresponsible supposition are welcome. If you think the answer changes depending on whether they're a columnist, a freelancer, or Hunter S. Thompson, answer for all.
djgh:
It goes beyond this if you're talking about a reporter, because expressing any views that might be construed as bias in an area you're responsible for covering could endanger your job and your paper.
If you're on a political beat and you go rant on your blog about how much you hate Barney Frank, it will end badly, regardless of whether you're staff or freelance. It's looser if it's something outside your beat, but even then I would recommend caution.
Most of that doesn't apply if you're a columnist, but in that case, one might wonder why you'd be blogging, since someone is already paying you to offer your opinions -- why give it away for free?
posted by camcgee at 11:39 AM on December 8, 2005
Cons: Views expressed on blog may differ from editorial stance of paper
It goes beyond this if you're talking about a reporter, because expressing any views that might be construed as bias in an area you're responsible for covering could endanger your job and your paper.
If you're on a political beat and you go rant on your blog about how much you hate Barney Frank, it will end badly, regardless of whether you're staff or freelance. It's looser if it's something outside your beat, but even then I would recommend caution.
Most of that doesn't apply if you're a columnist, but in that case, one might wonder why you'd be blogging, since someone is already paying you to offer your opinions -- why give it away for free?
posted by camcgee at 11:39 AM on December 8, 2005
It goes beyond this if you're talking about a reporter, because expressing any views that might be construed as bias in an area you're responsible for covering could endanger your job and your paper.
Doesn't appear to be a problem yet for the City Hall reporters at Theo (that's The Oregonian), who have had a blog up for a couple of months, and haven't been shy to express their fair share of bloggy snark.
posted by theonetruebix at 11:42 AM on December 8, 2005
Doesn't appear to be a problem yet for the City Hall reporters at Theo (that's The Oregonian), who have had a blog up for a couple of months, and haven't been shy to express their fair share of bloggy snark.
posted by theonetruebix at 11:42 AM on December 8, 2005
@theonetruebix
I had a look at that blog (http://www.oregonlive.com/weblogs/cityhall/) and of the posts I read, none expressed personal opinions about politicians or even about government policies or decisions. There's definitely a snarky tone to it, but it's pretty much straight reportage otherwise, albeit occasionally of things that wouldn't meet the traditional newsworthiness bar and sans the standard news format.
posted by camcgee at 12:44 PM on December 8, 2005
I had a look at that blog (http://www.oregonlive.com/weblogs/cityhall/) and of the posts I read, none expressed personal opinions about politicians or even about government policies or decisions. There's definitely a snarky tone to it, but it's pretty much straight reportage otherwise, albeit occasionally of things that wouldn't meet the traditional newsworthiness bar and sans the standard news format.
posted by camcgee at 12:44 PM on December 8, 2005
Response by poster: camcgee:
Most of that doesn't apply if you're a columnist,
Do you say that because columnists tend to wear their biases on their sleeves anyway?
posted by poweredbybeard at 1:47 PM on December 8, 2005
Most of that doesn't apply if you're a columnist,
Do you say that because columnists tend to wear their biases on their sleeves anyway?
posted by poweredbybeard at 1:47 PM on December 8, 2005
Response by poster: It hadn't occurred to me to ask about any distinctions between staff reporters and staff columnists...
posted by poweredbybeard at 1:48 PM on December 8, 2005
posted by poweredbybeard at 1:48 PM on December 8, 2005
Are you talking about journalists having personal Weblogs that they operate on their own? Or blogs they do for work, on their employer's site?
I have one of each.
posted by GaelFC at 2:46 PM on December 8, 2005
I have one of each.
posted by GaelFC at 2:46 PM on December 8, 2005
Response by poster: And Gael, did you start blogging before or after you were hired by MSNBC (I peeked)?
posted by poweredbybeard at 3:45 PM on December 8, 2005
posted by poweredbybeard at 3:45 PM on December 8, 2005
Benefit: It's a personal outlet for me, but it drives business. My blog supports my business site's search engine optimization. I get tons of leads from people who found the site via my blog. And it makes me look credible as an expert and as a writer.
Cost: I was already having my site hosted. The only real cost is in my time. And that time is less involved than going to networking events or cold calling. I can do it when I want, even at 3 in the morning, if that works.
posted by acoutu at 3:59 PM on December 8, 2005
Cost: I was already having my site hosted. The only real cost is in my time. And that time is less involved than going to networking events or cold calling. I can do it when I want, even at 3 in the morning, if that works.
posted by acoutu at 3:59 PM on December 8, 2005
Response by poster: Acoutu: sorry, I'm not totally clear. What is your business site (the nature of it, or the addy)?
posted by poweredbybeard at 4:37 PM on December 8, 2005
posted by poweredbybeard at 4:37 PM on December 8, 2005
I've been running PCJM since 1999, three jobs before MSNBC. I also did a work blog at the Star Tribune for a year.
My personal blog is my break, my relaxation, my fun. I try to never, ever post anything that could get me in any kind of trouble, with work or with people I know. I'm upfront about who I am and where I work, though I don't dwell on it. If journalists are smart about their personal blogs, I don't see why they shouldn't have them. My work blog links to my personal one, and vice-versa.
My personal blog was always a talker (positively) in job interviews, and it got me a bit of media attention, including a NYTimes mention, which is nice. And since I often hire bloggers to write for me at work, I like that I have a little blog cred of my own when dealing with them, separate from work.
posted by GaelFC at 12:25 PM on December 9, 2005
My personal blog is my break, my relaxation, my fun. I try to never, ever post anything that could get me in any kind of trouble, with work or with people I know. I'm upfront about who I am and where I work, though I don't dwell on it. If journalists are smart about their personal blogs, I don't see why they shouldn't have them. My work blog links to my personal one, and vice-versa.
My personal blog was always a talker (positively) in job interviews, and it got me a bit of media attention, including a NYTimes mention, which is nice. And since I often hire bloggers to write for me at work, I like that I have a little blog cred of my own when dealing with them, separate from work.
posted by GaelFC at 12:25 PM on December 9, 2005
I've had a lot of contact with journalists who've run both kinds of blogs, and those who have the blessing/permission/tolerance of their employers and editors have told me that it's, if nothing else, a great way to have a record of the stories they've done. ("my paper doesn't archive stories by byline, but there's no reason i can't do that myself.")
If you have a controlling editor or a paper that's uncomfortable being associated with an externally-published opinion being credited to one of its writers (Hello, NYT!) then *do not* start a publicly-viewable personal blog, even if you never talk about work or your professional stories on it. Unless you're not happy with your job, your only blogging option if your superiors are uncomfortable is a service that offers some privacy for your words, like LiveJournal et. al.
Feel free to email if you wanna know more, or get specific names of other journos to talk to.
posted by anildash at 12:26 AM on December 11, 2005
If you have a controlling editor or a paper that's uncomfortable being associated with an externally-published opinion being credited to one of its writers (Hello, NYT!) then *do not* start a publicly-viewable personal blog, even if you never talk about work or your professional stories on it. Unless you're not happy with your job, your only blogging option if your superiors are uncomfortable is a service that offers some privacy for your words, like LiveJournal et. al.
Feel free to email if you wanna know more, or get specific names of other journos to talk to.
posted by anildash at 12:26 AM on December 11, 2005
This thread is closed to new comments.
Can perhaps reach a different audience
Can cover different stories to those they cover in print
Can get feedback, discussion
Increases public knowledge of them, so might be more demand for their paper/column
Cons: Views expressed on blog may differ from editorial stance of paper, thus causing friction as paper worried that views on blog may be seen as views of paper
Expressing views may turn people off their (paper) column
I'm sure there are more (especially in the cons), but it's a start.
posted by djgh at 9:44 AM on December 8, 2005