There’s a very nice write-up of Firedoglake’s Libby trial live-blogging from today’s New York Times.
It was very interesting reading the comments thread over at FDL regarding the Times article. One of the things that jumped out at me was a comment that the MSM and bloggers could become complementary. (And complimentary, too, as witness this article) That dovetailed nicely with a story on NPR this morning about how newspapers who are axing their newsroom staff are actually shooting themselves in the foot. (BuggyQ mixes metaphors with reckless abandon!)
As Marcy (I think it was) noted, the MSM simply don’t have the time or the manpower to devote the kind of attention to detail that the blogs can on any given subject. Guys like Froomkin get this, I think. It would make much sense for the reporters to look on bloggers not as competition, but as more potential sources, as additional editors and fact-checkers, as allies.
And it’d be *cost-effective*, too! Too bad some of the egos involved on the MSM side will probably delay this for a good, long while.
“…a fanatical devotion to the intricacies of the Libby case, Firedoglake has offered intensive trial coverage…”
Gee, wouldn’t it be nice if the NYT took a fanatical devotion to the intracacies about anything they report, instead of publishing sound bites and slogans for the OVP.
I didn’t think it was all that nice. I thought it was condescending and trivializing.
Comments are closed.