I read an interesting article this morning about the differences between bloggers and journalists. The article at http://tinyurl.com/ch9kev states that both bloggers and journalists are valid content creators and each serves a separate and unique purpose. According to Mr. Lunn journalists have an ethical obligation to present unbiased information and search for the truth while bloggers have the freedom to espouse their self-annointed expertise on any particular subject.
In reality that difference seems pretty blurry to me. A flip through the 200 or so channels on most local cable systems will find the same topic presented as significantly different "truths" depending on the journalist or news organization. Additionally in presenting these "truths" most news organizations now engage professional bloggers and seek out viewer feedback. Broadcasting these opinions and comments legitimizes the voice of both bloggers and viewers elevating them to the rank of information originators. Is co-opting the ideas of these citizen journalists just more of the "truth" seeking or is it "truth" dilution?
The real "truth" is that we all--journalists, bloggers, viewers, whatever--bring our own lens to information. Whether we are creating or consuming it, the idea is packaged with our biases and filters. My idea might become your journalism which becomes someone else's blog. We are all in this crazy, glorious interconnected reality. Please retweet ;)
