« Music fun   |   Main   |   Hip pre-fab homes… with built-in networks I hope »

Blogging vs journalism: stacacotto viewpoints vs. synthesis

Back when I was doing tech research for NEC, I spent more of my day among the “trash tech pubs” than blogs. By that I mean the EWeeks, ComputerWorld’s and the like. The trash isn’t perjorative, but rather reflects how the free-sub mass-mail dead-tree copies just tend to pile up before being trashed.

Lately I’ve de-emphasized them in favor of blogs, and have ruminated on the contrasts.

I don’t hate these pubs, but they are what they are: vendor-push, press release and advertising driven. That means they were something I used in the same sort of way that the guys in the movie Men In Black used the supermarket tabloid: there’s truth in there somewhere, if only we can sort it out. As critical thinkers, we have to take everything with a grain of salt, but as with all boosterism, I view these guys as hype creators. [My jaded view is that as individual bloggers gain a monetary stake in the equation, they join this bunch. But that’s not bad: more data that’s readily parseable and digestible helps clarify markets.]

Let’s take one example around Digital Identity. A couple weeks back Mike posted on Marc Canter’s talk at Mobile Monday, with Marc pre-pimping his work for Microsoft around the Digital Identity World conference (you can get some of his take here). Lots of people talked about the conf, but I never pulled out anything substantive (could be my error).

However, in going through my feeds, I see that EWeek has come through with more information about Microsoft’s plans here.

And I wonder if that’s part of the difference between blogging and journalism: that blogging is self-motivated, only about things that interest a person, whereas “covering a beat” brings a charter, mission and measurable criteria (completeness). Conversations are great for developing things, but for the many themes that we just need to be aware of, it’s helpful to have gain a snapshot 360 view brought by the “distanced observers” that journalists have traditionally striven to be.