Comments on: Note to “old media” journalists: adapt, or stfu!

By: Stilgherrian · “Do Journos Do it Better?”

Stilgherrian · “Do Journos Do it Better?” — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 08:45:08 +0000

[...] I’m hoping the discussion doesn’t degenerate back into those tedious bloggers versus journalists arguments from last year. Certainly by year’s end they seemed to have faded. And we do seem to have a [...]

By: Stilgherrian · “Influence is the future of media”, eh?

Stilgherrian · “Influence is the future of media”, eh? — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 08:39:46 +0000

[...] triggered my controversial essay Note to “old media” journalists: adapt, or stfu! (parts of which were even translated into French in Le Monde), a wonderful response from the [...]

By: Stilgherrian · The future of “quality” journalism: lots of questions, few answers

Mon, 06 Apr 2009 11:14:39 +0000

[...] whinged about those awful bloggers. Hurrah! Unlike July 2008, when journos were still looking for someone to blame, the debate has finally moved [...]

By: Stilgherrian · (Si Si) Je Suis Un Blog Star!

Stilgherrian · (Si Si) Je Suis Un Blog Star! — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 01:28:40 +0000

[...] bien aimé cette phrase du blogueur australien Stilgherrian: “Ce qui est fatiguant dans cette fausse dichotomie c’est qu’elle compare les idéaux les [...]

By: Live event coverage using Twitter - World Youth Day | the earley edition

Live event coverage using Twitter - World Youth Day | the earley edition — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 21:26:24 +0000

[...] the internet leads a wending path, a range of discussions (starting with Jeff Jarvis and on to Stilgherrian’s comments section) brought me to news.com.au’s live Twitter coverage of the pope at WYD08 on [...]

By: Blogalaxie/4: “futur des médias” et “rumeurs” - Transnets - Blog LeMonde.fr

Tue, 22 Jul 2008 08:37:04 +0000

[...] bien aimé cette phrase du blogueur australien Stilgherrian : “Ce qui est fatiguant dans cette fausse dichotomie c’est qu’elle compare les [...]

By: Stilgherrian

Stilgherrian — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 06:06:54 +0000

@Helen and @Stephen Stockwell: When I had that stroll and chat with Jonathan Este, he told me he saw this as a Venn Diagram with two big circles. One was "journalists" and one was "bloggers", and there was a big overlap -- what you've identified as essay-writing. Then out at one side is the "hard news" that journos do, and the other side is the fluffy personal stuff that bloggers do. What we should be celebrating is that both groups of people, when they're at their best, produce wonderful material which illuminates our world and entertains us. Alas, the arguments focus on the disjunct parts of the diagram... [sigh].

By: Stephen Stockwell

Stephen Stockwell — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 04:15:54 +0000

@Helen: Your post raises some excellent points regarding the state of flux in the definition of Journalists / Essayists / Bloggers.

But aren’t the best Journalists often great essayists too? And aren’t the best Bloggers as adept at research and analysis as great Journalists?

By: Helen

Helen — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 01:58:11 +0000

Should have read, a LOT of the best blogging. (We don’t have sub-editors. Although that doesn’t seem to do much good at The Age. )

By: Helen

Helen — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 01:56:53 +0000

See, as a blogger myself I really hate the idea that (1) blogging should be about Journalism and (2) one should “break stories”. See John Quiggin or P Z Myers as an example of academics who share their knowledge and opinions in ways the rest of us can understand. That’s not “news” as I understand it, but it helps us understand the world. But I digress, kinda. I see a log of the best blogging as having NOTHING TO DO with Journalism. A really good blogger is an essayist — think Helen Garner, Charmian Clift, Bill Bryson, Paul Theroux, Bob Ellis, Lester Bangs… Yes these people have nothing in common stylistically, but I think you get my drift: NOT journalism. (And people, please note I said really good blogger — if you pop up with some throwaway comment about some idiot writing about their cat, you haven’t read for comprehension.)

A great many blogs, also, are close to op-ed, not journalism. And when I look at some of the crappy op-ed that gets into the dead tree newspapers, well. We have nothing to be ashamed of!

By: › links for 2008-07-20

› links for 2008-07-20 — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 23:34:42 +0000

[...] Stilgherrian · Note to “old media” journalists: adapt, or stfu! (tags: journalism oldmedia newmedia adapting) [...]

By: BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » A cure for curmudgeons

BuzzMachine » Blog Archive » A cure for curmudgeons — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 15:44:47 +0000

[...] to them. It might have helped the recent Australian-American Future of Media Summit that apparently descended into curmudgeonliness and “endless bloody whinging. Whinging about how journalism has [...]

By: Stilgherrian · Bloggers: the biggest whingers since journalists

Stilgherrian · Bloggers: the biggest whingers since journalists — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 03:09:06 +0000

[...] his piece in yesterday’s Crikey [local copy] betrayed his outsider status in his very first par: What is the future of journalism? To judge by [...]

By: skeptical

skeptical — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 02:51:42 +0000

The only poster who is making any kind of sense here is Simon Mansfield. Seriously, these bloggers just complain too much. Let’s see you lot actually write or break good stories. Well c’mon! Stilgh and that other one, whatshername — SilkCharm, keep spouting about oh-how-so-good are we that we’re such precious bloggers. Puh-lzzz… Let’s see you actually produce good and original stuff.

By: Stilgherrian

Stilgherrian — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 00:21:40 +0000

@Christie: You've found the very core of my essay. This is indeed yet another stupid binary opposite: journalists good and noble, bloggers bad and lazy. Pure rubbish, of course. Or, as I put it, "Bollocks". And indeed at the Future of Media Summit there was a slanging match over how "journalist" was defined when finance journo Jane Schulze started using what many people though was an overly narrow definition. @Simon Mansfield: I'm not making any point one way or the other about the "validity" of the term "citizen journalist". I was just quoting the terms which came up in the debate. I didn't deconstruct the term because that's peripheral to my main point, and I was already at 800+ words. As it happens, I'm not a fan of the term "citizen journalists". Adopting the tag "journalist" will inevitably annoy the folks who think they are journalists. And we are, as you point out, all citizens. We need another word for people doing reportage who are not "officially" journalists. Suggestions, anyone? You do keep repeating this notion that I (or is it someone else?) am claiming the blogosphere is better than journalists. I'm not, and I'm not seeing anyone else who is. I think you're reading way too much into what I write. I'm happy to clarify, but I'm starting to get annoyed that my position is being repeatedly misinterpreted. @Michael Meloni: News' feed of Papal happenings onto Twitter is a brilliant experiment -- simply because it's being done at all. I love that it's written in the first person. Quite engaging. Someone from news.com.au has invited me for a beer to explain how they're changing. I'll take him up on that soon. @Everyone else: Again, lots of good material, thank you! I've also asked Jonathan Este of the MEAA if I can republish the response he wrote for Crikey yesterday: Bloggers: the biggest whingers since journalists. It's a hoot. [Update: He has given permission, and you can read it here.]