Yale Global's Mark Glaser writes about blogs and bloggers:
In the US political sphere, boundaries are again being erased. Bloggers have led the charge to "fact check" the media, gaining prominence for pushing stories such as the questionable documents used by "60 Minutes II" in a report on President Bush's National Guard service. In one case, Australian blogger Tim Blair unearthed a fabricated source in a Chicago Tribune story, leading to the reporter's dismissal.
In these cases, bloggers have filled gaps in mainstream journalism. When corporate profits took center stage at media companies in the '80s and '90s, most news organizations cut back on fact-checkers and proofreading. A citizen brigade of thousands of interested readers checking controversial stories bolsters these strapped organizations. Consider it the new open-source method of fact-checking.
Despite the media rhetoric about bloggers being uninformed ranters in pajamas, and bloggers who deride the content of mainstream media (shortened to "MSM"), the two camps actually have a symbiotic relationship. The media needs bloggers for fact-checking, expert opinions, and for pushing stories on the edges. And the bloggers need the media as grist for their mills – and for all-important media mentions to attract wider audiences.
The rest is even better. Check it out.
So full marks to the dailykos guys for spotting the doctored photo?
Glaser is dead on. As one example the usual MSM tactics employed on the eve of national elections--late and outrageous hits that can't be answered--no longer work because of the blogs.
Kerry's embrace of the NYT's missing explosives story probably was the last nail in his coffin because it was debunked rapidly and made him look extremely foolish. This wouldn't have happened even four years ago.
When we step back and look where we are today, there is no reason not to be optimistic about the future. The Web has liberated us as surely as the 101st did Afghanistan.
Bloggers have led the charge to "fact check" the media
Someone will perhaps write a blog entry entitled "Who'll fact the fact checkers?" Visiting other right of center blogs, it's unfortunate that I keep seeing the same "errors" over and over again, as well as presenting administration spin even when it conflicts with the truth.
(As for the explosives, not only has al Qaqaa not been discredited, I'd suggest looking at the bigger picture.
Remember the Simpson's episode when they pointed out the Murderhorn to Homer? "No, Mr. Simpson, not that mountain, the one over there. No, keep turning Mr. Simpson, *that* one."
If Bush wins, 2005 is going to be filled with al Qaqaa after al Qaqaa as we try to figure out what happened to around 100,000 tons or much more of Saddam's arsenal. Books, articles, leaks, front page article after front page article.)
As the wack says, four more years of the same-o, same-o blather from the peanut gallery on the left.
In the meantime, the islamic terrorists suffer more defeats, the arab murderers in Darfur come under tighter international scrutiny, Iran's nuclear assets are bombed into oblivion, North Korea suffers yet more "mysterious" explosions, and the SCOTUS is further refined to support the US Constitution.
Four more years.
