to critique or not to critique...?

MORE: my post...

re: “I chose to concentrate instead on the opportunities”

Jeff,

Well… it’s hard to critique your stuff if it’s not *supposed* to be balanced… The way I see it, this “new journalism” can certainly do a much better job of giving people what they want and getting them to participate at a level previously impossible.

But would that be enough to fulfill the traditional function of journalism? To at least STRIVE to give a *balanced view* of what’s going on around us and thus act as one of the prongs of democracy? Unless you think that peoples’ aggregate special interests would necessarily lead there (and I see no good reason to believe that), that is the essential thing that would be lost (and it’s no small thing).

And what happens if the “old journalism” collapses before a functioning new one (however insufficient) takes over? (quite possible…) That’s why I don’t think that “accelerating” the process (“exploding” things before their time) is such a good idea…
But if you are *expected* to be the CHEERLEADER… you are certainly doing a fine job at that!

Delia

(http://www.buzzmachine.com/2006/11/11/edit-me/#comment-195206)

...

when in doubt... call them "cheerleader"?
(isn't that a term of endearment?)