Steve Benen at The Carpetbagger Report notes that, over the weekend, Michael Skube, a professor of journalism at Elon University, wrote an op-ed in the LA Times blasting blogs:
There was something appealing about this argument — one that no blogger would reject — when Lasch advanced italmost two decades ago. But now we have the opportunity to witness it in practice, thanks to the blogosphere, and the results are less than satisfying. One gets the uneasy sense that the blogosphere is a potpourri of opinion and little more. The opinions are occasionally informed, often tiresomely cranky and never in doubt. Skepticism, restraint, a willingness to suspect judgment and to put oneself in the background — these would not seem to be a blogger’s trademarks.
But they are, more often than not, trademarks of the kind of journalism that makes a difference. And if there is anything bloggers want more than an audience, it’s knowing they are making a difference in politics. They are, to give them their due, changing what is euphemistically called the national “conversation.” But what is the nature of that change? Does it deepen our understanding? Does it broaden our perspective?
The answer, according to Skube, seems to be ‘no’. This seems to be the prevailing opinion of the ‘elite’ in journalism and, sadly, in academia: bloggers aren’t real journalists, they’re too rude and too partisan to have any integrity, they don’t provide any deeper understanding of an issue.
Skulls in the Stars 