by Alex Massie
Like an over-matched Jack Russell terrier, plucky Jonathan Rauch will neither let go nor go away. I salute the scamp and his rascally determination to snap at any passing ankle!
And, actually, I take his point that new technology such as Kindle singles, apps and whatever comes next will offer writers and readers new and interesting ways to engage with one another. But it's hardly Blogs vs Apps since why can't you have both? Equally, blogging isn't for everyone and if some young writers are depressed by the pressure of being expected to produce X number of posts a day then, well, that's a shame but there are plenty of other things they can do.
Here's the core of JR's argument:
My claim is not that old media are perfect, it's that blogging is a format that makes producing good stuff difficult, which is why there's much less good stuff in the blogosphere.
[…] Every time someone who could have done good science does sloppy science, or does worse journalism instead of better journalism, or mediocre writing instead of fine writing, it's a loss. When resources are scarce—and of course human talent is the most scarce and precious resource of all—it matters if blogging is inducing ADD in many of our best writers and thinkers, or driving talent away altogether.
[…] Some bloggers and snippet-crunchers manage to do good work despite being handicapped by a terrible medium. All credit to them. But too many will never develop beyond blogspeak. The "old" way has its flaws, of course, but it is much, much better at challenging talent to do its best work.
Jonathan seems much more concerned by what one might term producer interests than those of consumers. That's his prerogative and not an unreasonable one either. Still, let me suggest there's at least one culturally-significant area of American life that was failed by the "mainstream" media and been immeasurably improved by the blogosphere. I speak, of course, of college football.
I defy anyone to examine the coverage of college football in the twenty leading American newspapers and twenty leading football blogs and not conclude that the latter does a vastly superior job. Places such as Brian Cook's Mgoblog (Michigan), Every Day Should Be Saturday (motto: Because College Football is Too Important to be Left to the Professionals), Burnt Orange Nation (Texas), Chris Brown's Smart Football, Matt Hinton's Dr Saturday (hosted by Yahoo) and many, many others analyse college football with a depth and sophistication you won't find in any newspaper or, much of the time, in Sports Illustrated or at ESPN either.
True, some of their coverage involves a measure of aggregation or piggy-backing on "old media" coverage but most of it is a reaction to the shortcomings of "legacy media" coverage of the sport. If the newspapers didn't cover college football at all, these blogs would still exist. As it is, most newspaper coverage isn't much better than a basic wire service. Context, opinion, colour and detailed statistical analysis are largely the preserve of the blogosphere.
In some respects many of the best of the football-bloggers build on the work of Bill James and his famous Baseball Abstract. That began as an amateur newsletter with a tiny band of subscribers and became something that revolutionised baseball. What everyone told you was true turned out to be less true than you were told. If James were beginning today he'd have started a blog. And, like at least some of his successors, he'd have made a living from it. (And plenty of team-specific baseball blogs are better than anything you'll get in the New York Times. At least bloggers tend not to over-value junk stats such as "wins" and RBIs)
Sure, the inky-wretches still produce some good stuff but the best coverage of NCAA Compliance issues comes from Yahoo Sports these days. Sure, that's a big company but it's still an example of the online world producing something that's better than most of what the traditional press publishes. Similarly, subscription services such as Rivals and Scout are the place to follow college recruiting. That's an industry that, for all it may be creepy to be obsessed with the decisions of 17 year-old kids, didn't exist in the pre-internet era.
Does this mean all college football blogs are great? Of course not. Most remain amateur – not a pejorative term, incidentally – enthusiasms, catering to communities obsessed by a common-interest. People write blogs for many reasons but the main ones are that they enjoy writing and have a point of view they'd like to share. Audience size is not always an important issue.
Equally, the virtues of the blogging format – space and time most obviously – coupled with an old media market failure have attracted new talent and given it room to thrive.
I know this because I love college football (Go Blue!) and quite like baseball too. I find it hard to believe that it is only things I am interested in that are well-covered by the blogosphere. I don't think this necessarily means blogging is some "revolution in human affairs" (though one day it could be, perhaps, in Iran) and accept that it's a "flea market". But as flea markets go it's pretty damn cool.
alexmassieATgmail.com
