Thursday, June 17, 2010

New Media

Some New York Times reporter named James Risen wrote an article claiming Afghanistan had $1 trillion worth of mineral deposits, which obviously would shift the balance of the world. But he was quickly bombarded with accusations of "bullshit" as it turns out, and I quote, "many of the story's purported revelations about Afghanistan's mineral reserves had been previously reported."

So how does young (cough) Mr. Rosen respond? Of course by the new trope (is that possible? is this the NEWEST trope?) that all bloggers are wiping Cheetos dust off their tighty-whities in their mom's basement:
Risen didn't take kindly to the blogospheric criticism. "Bloggers should do their own reporting instead of sitting around in their pajamas," Risen said.
I'm not a spokesman for bloggers; indeed, I'm at the forefront of the "We're Gay Unless the Name Changes" Movement. But the blogger/pajamas memé not only is getting tiring,  the fact is, what do people really think "New York Times reporters" do on a daily basis? I mean, this isn't Woodward and Bernstein; these guys aren't going in and sitting at a desk for 12 hours a day, with a typewriter and a water cooler. Someone like Risen is at his home office, or emailing his articles via his iPad wherever he may be. For all anybody knows or cares he is, theoretically, in his mother's basement jerking off into a bag of Cheetos while writing. And apparently he spent a lot of time on his "article" getting stories on his computer from other articles on the internet. Why would I assume Risen has gotten out of bed, showered, shaved, combed his hair, brushed his teeth, and gotten dressed more than anybody else?

1 comment:

Kiko Jones said...

By focusing on the whole pjs-in-the-basement thing you missed the guy's point, X. The gist is this: you have to be vetted somewhat, at least, to be a NYT reporter; the blogger simply requires a computer, an internet connection, and rudimentary knowledge of how to use the two. And because literally ANYONE can post shit on the intertubes, without an editor or a fact checker to say "Um, back up a minute", and even gain a substantial amount of followers in the process--your boy Charlie Daniels comes to mind--it's not exactly a ringing endorsement for blogging. So, you can just imagine the disdain this dude and many of his fellow "old" media types feel for bloggers, especially the ones that may openly criticize them w/o having any real credentials open for scrutiny.

Personally, I liked the world better when you had to have the credentials to get a reporting/Op-Ed gig and subsequently have your opinions read. (Or impress an A&R guy to get signed and have your music out there, for that matter.) Sure, there were unfair dealings and unqualified folks given a chance, and now there's the freedom for ANYONE to have their work out there w/o the constraints of the big, bad Establishment. But man, w/o the floodgates the amount of shit floating out there has grown exponentially. I doubt the amount of worthy stuff has grown even half as much.