re:”I’d love to see a way reporters can work with ordinary folks to improve their understanding of the communities they cover. I just haven’t seen a model that has worked. Steve Outing recently reported on his effort, and the results were disappointing. What gets in the way of developing such an effort, in part, is the constant carping about the sins of the “MSM.” We need trained, professional, journalists. And we need to input from people who live in the communities they cover. No argument there, from me at least. The question is how best to do it.”
Well, I suppose we would “need” all sort of things if we could just get them for free:)… Why would “ordinary people” spend their time and volunteer their knowledge etc. to help out the journalists so… the latter can continue to make money at it? This is what the vast majority of these projects are trying to do: either upfront — and those at least have a modicum of honesty - or, much more often, as an undisclosed ultimate goal.
P.S. I doubt anybody’s going to come up with a for-profit model that will work for the long run. And even if it did happen, such models would always be vulnerable to equivalent non-profit models that would use the profits to advance the mission and would thus treat the contributing “ordinary people” that make these kind of projects work with the respect they deserve. D.
re: “…But I cannot imagine he lives in the present-day world when he claimed in the speech: “Most of the blog world does not even attempt to report. It recycles. It riffs on the news. That’s not bad. It’s just not enough. Not nearly enough.”
This is simply not true going forward, and he should have done some reporting on the subject to find out. There is an ever-increasing number of online outlets who are doing most excellent online reporting.” (Kara Swisher)
I thought you had some valid criticism in this regard: “Oddly, because most of them are intelligent people, they don’t seem to notice the source of many of the stories they read online — the so-called MSM.”
As far as I see it, Kara just has an optimistic view of the future… which is fine, as long as she acknowledges it… — “an ever increasing number”? –> even if true and she doesn’t back up her claim although she charges Keller with the same “crime”, you need a strong dose of optimism to get from that to her conclusion:” this is *simply not true* going forward” [my emphasis].
P.S. re: “Not enough, of course, never enough, but it is a clear trend in almost every category.” –> this claim by Kara definitely needs shown research to be taken seriously. D.
"re: “At a certain point surely we just have to reconcile ourselves to the fact that a large proportion of these people aren’t interested in engaging with this debate.”
As I was saying, the opposing side isn’t backing up their claims either (Kara is a good example) so they appear to be guilty of the same sin… and are thus equally responsible for the lack of actual debate.
P.S. It seems to be a silly game of lets see who can yell louder and can get more of “their friends” to yell along with them… D.