I am against this statement:
Blogging has significantly impacted the print journalism industry.
I dont think blogging has affected print journalism. They are two different worlds, with two different audiences.
I dont believe people go to blogs to get factual information. Most print journalism was originally intended to get important information to the public. It was always assumed that the journalist researched the facts, talked with experts and the newspaper had the responsibility to make sure everyone followed the rules, which gave them a good reputation. Of course the good reputation resulted in more readers, more advertisers and more money. Blogging on the other hand seems to me to be a social tool. Anyone and everyone can give their opinion, even without any research or qualifications, just an opinion.
I know qualified institutions are blogging now which leads me to think that the institution has qualified workers blogging, but the responses would be just random peoples opinions.
I'd rather read the opinions of experts than of a random person.
How much print media comes into your house weekly? I know I only get a Sunday paper anymore and go to the web and work to get the rest of my current evente
ReplyDeleteMelanie,
ReplyDeleteI read most of your blog, and while I disagree with your thesis that blogging does not affect print journalism, I really like how you displayed the idea. The thought of two different audiences did not occur to me, and it is true to an extent. This is a great argument for your thesis. All of your research was well conveyed and was able to be viewed in a way that may support your thesis. Well done. That being said, I think that in the audience perspective, blogging has taken a lot of print journalism's audience and this has impacted their spread and economic situation.
Great job on this project. Keep up the great and different view points. It was nice to work with you in this class.
~Brittany Firth