Don’t Get Blogged Down in New Vs Traditional Media (Non)Debate
Feb 13th, 2008 by Donagh
I was going to write a post as a reaction to yet another throw-enough-shit-at-the-wall-and-hope-some-of-it-sticks article from The Dubliner. Their plan seems to be to finance the printing of an expensive glossy magazine by trying to attract an almost exclusively online audience. Does the article draw the battle lines between new media and old? Well, no, because once again it’s not quite sure what it’s trying to say.
On the one hand it seems to chastise traditional media outlets, or MainStream Media (MSM) for being pitifully slow at developing the means to publish their content for an online audience. At the same time its also saying that bloggers (somehow, as its not explained) are undermining the status of salaried journalists in the eyes of their employers. These bastards, apparently, are eager to benefit from an increase in their online audience and are now forcing ordinary jobbing journalists to take on more work by requiring them to provide more regular updates for a newpaper’s and magazine’s website and/or any affiliated blogs. I don’t know, should they involve themselves in some sort of collective action rather than taking a pop at bloggers? Just a thought.
However, I could go on at length, especially about the point raised by Harry Browne that Irish political bloggers, a fraternity which, thanks to the Irish Blog Awards, I’m grateful to be considered a part, waste their energy tapping away to a small number of people – who, he suggests is often more than those who are willing to listen to them in the real world (thanks, Harry) – rather than marching in the streets.
It hasn’t occurred to the writer or Harry Browne (who’s credited as a media lecturer at DIT, but fails to mention that he also writes for The Dubliner) that its possible for ‘political bloggers’ to do both. Indeed, a short look around Irish political blogs (some of whom are even written by TDs and Councillors), both before and after the last election would indicate that these blogs often provide accounts of what people who are politically involved get up to.
And also, so what if people who have a healthy interest in politics wish to speak to others who have a similar level of interest? At least they’re not charging them the price of a newspaper or magazine for the privilege of reading their opinion.
So, as I said, I was going to go talk about this. But now I don’t have to, because Hugh Green has written an excellent riposte and, as usual it’s much better than anything I could have written. He also makes points that I hadn’t even thought of – but perhaps that’s not too surprising.
Harry Browne´s got it right, as usual. I mean, when will Michael Taft get out of his ivory tower blogsite and start getting his hands dirty with real politiking? Writing a blog and being involved in wage negotiations for the trade union movement is all well and good but it´s hardly the mean dirty streets of lecturing in journalism in DIT, is it?
Yea, I wouldn’t be surprised if ‘Campaigning’ Harry Browne was forced to hit the streets to sort out a therapists for his RSD that he got writing articles and lecturing about the political complacency of others for The Dubliner.
While looking in to that other Dubliner article I came across one of his that explored the notion that, since the appointment of Ms. Kennedy, the Irish Times has shifted to the right. Surely he means further to the right - but anyway. He concludes that it’s difficult to pin down the IT politically as it doesn’t commit to one line or the other and if its politics is attributable its to a small c-conservativism.
He actually makes some good points, and says, significanly I think, that many of the media types he talked to had strong opinions about the political bias of the Irish Times but were not willing to say so on record.
Some unnamed source is quoted as saying:
This is not explored though, because it seems clear that this ommission is based on a strategic business decision. Ideology doesn’t even enter into it. Unless colluding with a major vested interest is an ideology now.
Irish Times is right wing. Really.
I always saw it as always on the left. Certainly since the departure of Myres. Their heavy hits in Fintan and Browne are far from right wing. And obama gets lot more coverage then McCain for instance.
Its a newspaper that tries to avoid ideological badges in any obvious sense. Its part and parcel of politics in Ireland where you have people who say that there is no left and right in Ireland. Everything is based around the centre. But if you talk to someone from outside Ireland who had spent any time here at all they would say that the two main political parties are whole-heartedly right-wing.
So too is it with the Irish Times. While in other countries you see quality dailys that are considered as being either Left or Right wing, in Ireland we are led to believe that no such distinction exists. The only ideological division is between competing brands of nationalism.
Sure, in the IT you have two columnists who have a liberal point of view. But they are only columnists, and although Fintan O’Toole is Assistant Editor his politics, such as one can distinguish them as being explicitly left-wing, could hardly be seen as influential within the paper. The IT is a paper that has been consistently middle class, and aimed exclusively at the professional classes in Ireland who are after all, a very conservative bunch.
So, if you think that the Irish Times is left wing, perhaps you are even more to the right than you think