The Difference Between Tradional Style Reporting and New Media
by Steve RemingtonJuly 13, 2007
There are differences between a reporter and an online journalist. I have emphasized time and time again that reporters and online journalists can basically do the same work but when it is all said and done, the material gets posted online or in a newspaper. I still believe that much of the characteristics are the same and you can become a fine reporter and publish your stuff online. But there really are some differences.
One of the differences is what we can do once we get those facts. The typical reporter regurgitates the facts and compiles them into a nice sequence of events. The online journalist, also known to readers as “bloggers”, can actually take that factual information and talk about how he/she feels on the subject. Actually the commentary is the most important part of the article and can really measure the success or failure of the blogger. One of the reasons blogs are so popular is that not only are you getting the news but you can choose which blogs will give you the best commentary and which ones come the closest to your own beliefs.
Most of the commentary you find online would not hold up well in a well established local newspaper article. The newspaper would lose readers, sponsors, and probably some writer or editor would get chastised or even fired from their job. The beauty of blogs is you are your own boss and you can report the news and then either accept or reject it.
The Copy and Paste Syndrome
This brings me to my next point. How many times have you arrived at a blog and all they do is copy and paste the news? I think it is important for a blogger to quote their sources and put in direct quotes from articles, especially with a link back, but have you see those blogs where the author says, “hey check out this article… pretty cool stuff…” followed by a long copy and pasting from another website? Maybe it is a press release or an online magazine article.
This is what destroys a blogger. I like to call it the Copy and Paste Syndrome because after you do it once it becomes easier. It is like an addiction. Next thing you know 5 out of 6 articles become a copy and pasting. Even if it is done legally it is just not good for the blogger. What the blogger has to hold on to is his opinion which is rare with traditional style reporting. Of course there has always been the bias, but not the blatant in your face, “I agree or disagree” commentary.
So there is a difference in online media and traditional media in this sense. So what does this mean? Does this mean readers like bias material? You betcha! What is interesting is as a blogger you can remain professional and slam your opposition. Readers like it. But what is happening with new media, is that there is a larger focus on “niche”. There are higher levels of loyalty. The readers pick and choose what they want to read. With traditional newspapers I can either read the Bangor Daily News in the morning or read nothing at all. There is such a larger target which is regional and not based on such a specific value system. There are hunters, non-hunters, anti-hunters, Republicans, and Democrats who all read the Bangor Daily News.
New media cuts through all the geographical barriers and allows you to pick and choose who to market based on some other factor… which in most cases is stemmed from a value system. Those who like and believe in what you have to write will be your loyal readers. So in order to survive as a blogger, writing about a specific topic of interest, you need to reveal to others what your value system is. What is it you believe in so deeply?
This is new territory for a reporter but the atmosphere has changed since the dawning of the Internet. As a writer you have the ability to write and report about your passions. As a reader you can choose to read more specifically about the things that interest you.
I have worked as a “traditional” journalist for a newspaper and even considered making journalism my career. What stopped me was exactly what you pointed out, I couldn’t write about what I thought about a situation, I just had to give the facts.
I think that’s why blogs are becoming so popular. People want to read what other people think about things. A recitation of the facts is helpful to get the bare bones of an issue, but it isn’t always interesting. A discussion of an issue usually is.
As a side note, I completely agree about blogs that simply become recaps of news articles. I hate that. If you post a bit of a news article and comment on it that’s one thing. Just reprinting the article is boring, and I tend to avoid blogs that frequently fill their posts that way.
That is a good article and really makes you think, I know I am. Our rights to free speech is getting tougher and tougher all the time and the right to voice your own opinion should not be taken lightly.
Kristine was correct when she said “people want to read what other people think about things” and I agree.
I never thought about it but, the copy and paste syndrome makes a lot of sense and I myself will certainly try to not get caught in it. It is easy to do though without even thinking about it.
Ooops – guilty as charged :-/ Something I definitely have to improve on..
I do feel though that there is some value in this type of post – I pull these articles in from lots of different sources, and I have had readers indicate that they enjoy coming to one place to see them all.
I agree that if this is all that a blogger does, then they are sounding their own death knell. Opinions are important too. I also believe little glimpses into the personality of the blogger are important – anecdotes and ramblings – that let readers develop a “relationship” with the blogger..
Steve, another great post. I never really think of bloggers as reporters, but it is an interesting comparison.
It has always seemed to me that traditional media reporters do often slant the news with an opinion. Unfortunately, it is not their opinion, but the opinion or political leanings of the publication they write for.
Bloggers are able to blatantly state their opinions. Readers will gravitate to those blogs when they agree – and often even more so if they disagree.
I’m glad you pointed out the sin of cut and paste posts. I find myself overlooking blogs that often have the same news clip as every other blog without anything new or fresh to add to it. I’m afraid that some people think they must post X amount of posts everyday and so they take a few shortcuts (maybe from the self imposed pressure).
Tom at Black Bear Blog (is this your father?) has one of the best new media news sites in my opinion. His posts generally are about some piece of news and he always gives his opinion on the story and how he thinks it will affect outdoorsmen. That is why so many people follow his blog, rather than just subscribing to the outdoor news feeds. They want to know how he feels about it.
Yeah, Tom is my dad. He spends all day researching topics. He has an opinion and isn’t afraid to share it.
It’s like when Jim Zumbo hit the news. Everybody knew what happened but wanted to get people’s opinions on it. That is why copy and pasting is just reporting the news all over again. We need to focus, as bloggers, more on how the news affects us and provide opinion.
Thanks Darrell for the comment.
I’m glad you mentioned Jim Zumbo, because I’ve been wanting to do a post about that whole thing. I’ll have it up tomorrow.
[...] are new media and they SHOULD include opinions. Not everyone’s opinion is going to be the same. Some of the traditional media outlets have [...]
[...] never really considered bloggers to be reporters. But, Steve at Skinny Moose Media made some interesting comparisons between traditional reporters and new media (bloggers). The difference between the two, as Steve suggests, is the ability of bloggers to give [...]