You're now on the archive server. Commenting has been disabled.
Bloggers Run the World - Thanks for the Confirmation
By Static Chaos, only after disaster can we be resurrected
"...I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding..."
In addition, the President also made the following comment:
“What I hope is that people start understanding if you're getting your newspaper over the Internet, that's not free and there's got to be a way to find a business model that supports that.”
Since President Obama confirmed that bloggers do run the world, I’d like to dedicate this blog to respond to his comments.
Liberal markets, or capitalism, has been dominant in the Western world since the end of feudalism. In a liberal market, there is no central planning authority but prices are determined by the demand-supply scale. The media space is very much like any market segment where supply and demand is determined by the competitiveness of each market participant.
News organizations have failed miserably in the competiveness department. Across the country, newspapers are struggling to maintain readership and advertising revenue that has been lost to the Internet. Thousands of journalists have been laid off, and over the last year several newspapers have closed.
In addition to outdated business models, another reason people turn to blogs for news is that bloggers tend to be independent thinkers; and most do not charge a fee with the exception of proprietary materials. On the other hand, the news media tends to be biased towards liberal and socialistic ideals, which is one constituent group of Obama, and the Democratic Party. In addition, many news organizations are starting to charge a fee for internet content. It shouldn’t be a surprise which one the public flocks to in this economy.
Obama’s blanket statement implying “blogs are written without serious fact-checking, and attempts to put stories in context” is highly misleading and inflammatory. To be fair, one has to admit that there may be some bloggers posting irresponsible opinions; however, the mainstream media also has their share of bad apples if not more...remember Dan Rather & CBS?
The right to freedom of speech is recognized under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in international human rights law in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). It essentially means:
“Liberty to express opinions and ideas without hindrance, and especially without fear of punishment.”
Even though the United States legal systems have not treated freedom of speech as absolute, the liberal tradition has generally defended freedom of speech because a free interchange of ideas is considered as an essential ingredient of democracy, innovation and progress.
As much as the West, with the U.S. being the most vocal, has been condemning China for its media censorship, one could not help but sense a whiff of media control and censorship in the President’s remark.
As a nation, we do not need another bailout of incompetent businesses. Bailouts and restructuring into non-profits, as suggested by Obama, only guarantees the continuation of a proven failed business model. This strategy would only undermine the already tenuous nature of objective journalistic integrity and move the U.S. one step closer towards the much despised controlled market approach.
By Static Chaos, only after disaster can we be resurrected
»
Sadly with Schumer's (D-NY)recent addition to a media bill bloggers still won't get the protection for their sources they should. Journalism should be defined by newsworthiness and not by the establishment you work for IMHO.
P.S. Dan Rather is still around with his very good show - Dan Rather Reports.
Blue Pill ? Viagra , or the other kind ?- Chillistatin
Its good to see the thoughts and opinions shared drift away from Unions and on to topic. Freedom of speech and expression . Our nations leader truly reveals his inner man every time he opens his mouth . Not the one I would have in the drivers seat . But his monkey army in the Senate and Congress are the real sellouts of our freedoms . Until BO becomes our El dictatore, he still has to cast his spell over them to do his will.
Remember Congress is willing and ready to turn over the powers of the internet to him in the name of "national security " . Where did we hear this before ? Around 9/11 wasn't it ?
Poor Obama, so "brilliant" and yet he can't recall that broadcast television was/is free and they've figured out how to make money without his help.
I feel bad for people who can't see that Obama's playing them for a sap. - S Brennan
Poor Obama, so "brilliant" and yet he can't recall that broadcast television was/is free and they've figured out how to make money without his help.
I feel bad for people who can't see that Obama's playing them for a sap.
Obama's words represent a glimpse of something really dangerous - an attempt to impose a restriction to free speech. Just vote against Obama and all other representatives of the Elite!
You had me in the beginning but lost me at this complete bullocks statement:
"On the other hand, the news media tends to be biased towards liberal and socialistic ideals..."
It is certainly true that many have turned towards the "blogosphere" for their news, but that it is not because this the liberal bias myth.
You obviously haven't spent much time actually reading main stream media - printed or otherwise. The conservative bias of the mainstream (print and broadcast) is both palpable and proved in many studies.
Also, any yapping about unions is just distractions.
This article sounds like another rant from another neo-con nutjob who is fearing the short-lived advantage anonymous blogging provided. The author is just scared that blogs about birth certificates, Muslim moles, healthcare to illegals (which we already provide), and about he hates America and is bent on it's destruction is going to lose it's punch.
Anyone here who thinks the media has a liberal bias in this day and age is just willfully ignorant. The media is no more liberally biased than it is neo-con biased. The media is just void of news content period designed to appeal to lower brain function whether it be from the left or right.
You all might not be socialists (I'm not) but you should realize that socialism is just a reaction to corruption in the system. It is not an action. Fix the corruption, level the playing field and there will be no need for socialistic ideas -- or unions.
Uh guys and gals, lets remember that Obama said everyone should take the blue pill.
Just like all that have held that office and the others in the past century or so.
I would like to sit Obama down and have a little chat with him about evolution because it seems that he does not understand how it works, and if he does, then he doesn't appreciate it.
If I want to get a job reporting for a reputable newspaper, then I have to play their game, I have to shmooze their way, grease their palms, adopt their tribal behaviour, say yes to the right people, basically suck dick and not be me. It's like that right thoughout the 'professional' environment leasing to the sanitized, washed out and thoroughly uninspiring pile of starched linen they call the MSM. There is a selection pressure in the MSM, but it does NOT lead to a flow of information that belongs being directed in any other direction than the sewer.
But out here in 'the interweb' absolutely anybody can have an opinion, jump up and rant about it, which is such a bad thing according to the big-O.
Um...well here's the thing, genius. If you suck then nobody listens to what you say. Yes, every idiot has an opinion, but only those with talent draw an audience. Out in the blogosphere, 'reporters' rise to prominence because they have something to offer, not because they suck GE dick (figuratively speaking...or maybe not).
That's pure evolution right there, natural selection in an environment of truly free press with a selection pressure being applied by people who actually want to consume news that comes even slightly close to describing reality. Seems Obama could do with some schoolin'.
The sad truth is that Obama's power-base demand that he pander to big business, who are the same morons losing big clinging to an obsolete media model.
Excellent post. I thoroughly enjoyed this thank you.
IMHO, the President's comments were formed after he agreed to see Charlie Sheen.
Apparently, the President, a Harvard Grad, was shocked that an actor, who's primary qualification is being the son of an actor, turned out not to be the most adroit presenter of facts and the sources of what was presented as fact shocked the President even more.
To form such an opinion in the face of freedom of speech points to a deep-seated contempt by the President of the American public's, chain smoking, beer swilling, non-bowling lack of intellectualism. The very principal of the Democratic Party is that the masses are but children and government the maternal(istic) caretaker. A principal that mus have been strongly reinforced as a result of the visit.
Thanks Charlie.
Well, it is a fact that 90% of the 30-80 crowd is nothing but 200,000,000 adolescents with ear hair.
O met with Charlie really?
for real or just in Charlie's mind?
Congress and the House are currrently considering two separate bills.
Both will remove protections from revealing resources from any non-approved journalists.
Only journalists that work for approved MSM will be protected.
Cutting the throats of any voices that do not spew the propaganda of the moment.
We are in so much trouble, so much.
If Obama has his way he will be President for life and First Leader of the Supreme World Order.
Any chance to to get the links for these bills?
I second this request.
Still waiting ....
http://www.alternet.org/rss/the_wire_provided_by_huffington_post/94006/_...
Now folks, think again about what I wrote above. I may, or may not, be able to check back here but I can tell you for certain that a) news companies are fucked horribly by their debt, and b) if they get bailed out in any way, shape, or form, do any of you with brains really think they're not going to have to instantly convert to the party line (that they have been following of their own accord already)?
Wake up and see - it's not just the god-damn financial, auto, health, and other industries these people want to control.
Feel free to adjust my tinfoil hat, but I work in the industry in a way and it is dying slowly if someone doesn't come in and "save" them.
It took the political blogs to wake me up. I remember fools telling me the same crap Obumbler just stated that there was no fact checking. Those blogs like these link most everything but commentary.
I find it insulting, just like then, that I am some type of dupe and don't have the intelligence to decide for myself.
Leave me the hell alone, I am the consumer and can decide for myself you bunch of Fascist pigs.
Sorry, I know it sucks to realize that freedom long ago left our borders, but please keep in mind it is for:
(pick one, or more, of the following)
A. Your own health and safety
B. If it saves just one child
C. For the public health and safety
D. To defend against evil: terrorists, drug dealers, potheads and/or communists
E. For christ's sake, it doesn't matter the reason, we are the gubment dammit and we know what is good for you. shut up and roll up your sleeves, we need to inject this poison into you to protect you from the common cold and by the way, according to your bank account you can afford up to $5000 for this shot, so we are charging you a "income-level" based donation of $4999, plus $5 for processing to cover your allocated price for you protection. The NBoA will retain fees and taxes for overdrawing your account because we are taking the balance. Cripes, farkin publicly educated Americans still don't realize that we are omnipotent and staffed with completely competent, hard working guvbots that always do what is best for them.
Pehaps folks should focus on the widespread lack of trust in MSM.
as this presidency goes on, why can I not help but think of Animal Farm
you are not alone.
I would like to tell "President" Obama, the IDIOT that he is, to buzz off and mind his own damn business. We don't need the fuhrer to tell us what we should and should not read.
If bloggers now run the world, I guess Zero Hedge is the new Goldman. So when's the IPO?
A few ways to (modestly) raise the visibility of ZH in the 'blogosphere':
Goto http://technorati.com/blogs/www.zerohedge.com and http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/zerohedge.com. Write reviews of the site. Link to it in your own blogs.
Download the alexa.com and compete.com toolbars, installing it in a browser you use mainly for reading ZH. Try to use ONLY this browser for reading ZH. And, as always, click on the ads from time to time.
1st rule of fight club is?
2nd rule of fight club is?
Now I understand. FLAG@Whitehouse.gov was a public service, a first attempt to stop people shouting at each other across the void and rather allow the government to help direct us towards mutual understanding. How visionary....
May I recommend a new e-mail address since flag@whitehouse.gov is no longer in use? For some reason Stasi@whitehouse.gov has a nice ring.
As for journalism in the U.S., most journalists are incapable of critical thought and think the Socratic Method is a Greek sexual position. The lack of valuable content is why they are losing and will continue to lose.
Furthermore, the loss of these papers enriches society because it reaffirms democratic principles. The people are voting every day with their actions. Newspapers lose, blogs win.
People are reading more newspaper material than ever, they are just not paying for it. Someone will figure out a business model for the newspapers on the internet (probably apple or amazon). There is still something to be said for journalism, and I include bloggers as journalists.
I knew BarriO was a fraud when he first appeared on the national radar...and ANYONE who cut their political teeth in Chago HAS to be corrupt. The guy is a congenital liar from A to Z...even better than Bubba.
If blogs run the world then that means they'll read this:
I hereby order the Whitehouse and all of CONgress to take a three year vacation back to where you came from. In that time you shall speak (two way) with every one of your constituents. Try to get a clue about what it is you're supposed to be doing. Full report due upon return.
J6P
Isn't talk radio much more destructive, bias, and partisan than the blogosphere?
Now you are learning Daddy Obama.
Forget the newsprint. It is dying a slow death.
Forget the paid news services online trying to be newspapers. No one wants it.
All news media (Including Fox) repeat and regurgitate the same content all the day every 21 minutes with a break every 7 minutes for advertising. Unless something breaks news.
DTV in the USA is nothing but local news easily captured online prior to the nightly news.
CBS, NBC, ABC and others like it are dead, just not yet cold.
White House Press Conferences don't really deal with the hot issues of the moment.
CNN has a hard time getting away from work safe and nursery safe stories with tear jerking and heartbreak. They played the replay of the pictures from Samoa all the day today. Blech.
Where were you Mr Obama when the Quake hit? Why are you not on air telling us what we, the USA are doing to help out?
Blogs are good, they are self cleaning. Capable of sniffing out the bull, stinker and irrelevant. The internet is gaining traction because millions of unemployed have time on their hands.
Time they can use to stay ahead of trouble in the form of misleading, hours old and irrelevant media broadcasts and lack of guidance and leadership where it counts.
It is uncomfortable to sit up in the light and say something to the world and hear it back from the world via Twit, Blog and Forums with your every word torn down and examined under the microscope for clarity, no-bull and solid information that is actionable.
Hah. /sarcasm.
Good article Tyler +1
i dont intend for this to be a comment that is backing obama, but...
i think the president was commenting more about the signal to noise ratio in the blogosphere than any niche of blogs in particular. meaning - most of the blogosphere is opions and rants and no fact checking. there are very popular blogs guilty of this. there are also many popular and unpopular blogs that dont. the intimation (that i see) is that he implies newspaper signal to noise ratio in this area is much much lower.
now, i almost completely abhore mainstream media. i cant stand the 24 hr news channels and their polarizing figures and politicalization of issues. however, i do have to get information from somewhere. my local paper lets me read the first couple paragraphs. i have yet to see an article i feel compelled to buy the paper for. its a horrible publication full of typos and errors. the latimes lets me read for free if i can find the articles.
this new media v. old argument is pretty played out. we all know the internet is the way of the future. but its the ethics and reputation that newspapers have (had) and (try) to adhere to that make most of them more reputable than blogs. now, they all have their politics and you have to deduce that and read their articles with that in mind, but isnt that the same thing done here on the blogs? reading ZH as f every word is undoubtedly true is proposterous.
it kind of makes you think to jon stewart - he reports news stories with a humorous bent. the idea is for you as an individual to investigate the news further and form your own opinion. not for the opinion to be disseminated by ANY news source or blog.
the opinion in this article turns into an irrational rant about liberty and freedom of speech. which has little to do with producing accurate information and encouraging readers to investigate further.
Good points. I thought the Dan Rather crack was a bit much. That was the exception, not the rule. (or at least it used to be) Not to defend Obama, but fact checking, “truth in journalism” etc. is definitely lacking in this internet thingy.
Another problem is that people are tuning into only what jibes with their view and filtering everything else out. This is happening with newspapers and TV too, e.g. the right watches Fox and the left CNN, but it is accelerating on the internet. Because of low cost, you can easily build a site catering to very a small group. Look around. There are some very extreme sites out there.
For society at large, this polarization is very bad since it leads to intolerance and possible increased violence. But what can you do? Force people to read what they don’t like?
I disagree re: truth in journalism being missing from the blogosphere. Au contraire, the comment stream is an outstanding review process.
If you read an article in a newspaper, it may have been reviewed by the editor. More likely, the grammitical errors and style issues were corrected.
If you read a publication in a reputable scientific journal, it will have been reviewed by the editor and perhaps two "peer" reviewers before being accepted for publication. You, the reader, never see the reviews.
When you read a blog post and the comments, the editor is missing but you get to read the comments. In my view, this is a much more informative process than a scientific journal article and in a completely different league than a newspaper. I have far more confidence in the information gleaned from two or three blogs, along with the comment stream, on a particular subject than an article in the WSJ or NYT on the same subject.
Again, in my view, the real value of ZH is the comments.
My $0.03 (It's Friay night. Overtime.)
guys - i dont think he was "correct" as much as i feel the perception is correct. we obviously need better news sources. the point of my comment is to determine where that comes from and seek it out. and to also take all news with a grain of salt until we can review substance and form our own opinions. ZH is obviously quality news and reporting is not slightly conspiratorial. sometimes i think thats a good thing. sometimes i think it goes overboard. but i know i can find good information here.
and thats the point. the president is not going to say "blogs are bad, mmm'kay". but he is right to worry about the source of all the conflicting information being bandied about. the same way we view fox news and cnbc is how some view this site. the idea here is to make sure we put the information up front and help people open the doors themselves. and i think thats somehow articulated in the manifesto for this site.
I disagree. The BO opinion was an "irrational rant" ... TD is right to post a strong minded lecture on the first amendment, hopefully the freshman is listening.
for those who like their views and minds shaped
by the cia controlled press then blogs will
appear as rants....
for those who think that the old guard "news"
media are a superior source of information
when it serves up stories about tawana brawley
and a string of other frauds then the internet
will be a source of consternation....
when time magazine publishes stories about 40
million homeless people and the source of the
story admits that he pulled the number out of
his ass and the public wearies of these hype-lies
then of course people like you will find the
internet a sore spot....
i am very happy to read rants which supply news
over state controlled pravda-esque "news"
organizations which do nothing but anesthetize
minds to lies like 911 being an al-qaueda operation
and john kennedy being killed by a lone gun-man....
your opinion is nothing but a rant for continued
state approved news which has little to do with
producing accurate information....
thanks for giving us the establishment viewpoint
but most of us already knew that....you could
have saved the electrons...it's old news...
a tiche off topic but still germane - insight into the zh phenomenon
http://nymag.com/guides/money/2009/59457/
Static Chaos,
Excellent. Nothing more to add..
Thanks for not wasting pixels.
Be nice if you decided to join me and save us the Ross Perot realization.
They'll have to shut down the net to accomplish what they desire.
Just saying. Otherwise, they're toast in spite of the runup in mediaco stocks.
"On the other hand, the news media tends to be biased towards liberal and socialistic ideals, which is one constituent group of Obama, and the Democratic Party."
Apparently you haven't watched the news in more than 20 years. The press hasn't been liberal for as long as I can remember. Your comment is knew-jerk cliche that hasn't been accurate since Carter's Little Liver pills.
It's like the old cliche from the 1960's about the Eastern establishment press.
CNBC is liberal? Fox news is a bunch facsist mouth pieces for Rupert Murdock, who hasn't had a conscience of any kind, much less a social conciousnes. The fact is that most media is so used by an oligarchy of fat cats, that social ideas are no where to found.
I think you're relying on cliches from the past.
Well there you have it folks. The media is not liberal, merely an innocent victim of a vast right wing conspiracy.
Hey Tyler, turn off the lights, this pearl of wisdom just does us in.
---FACEPALM----
You've got to be kidding.
Where was the investigative press last year during the presidential campaign? They gave Barack Obama a complete and total pass, period. Almost nothing was said in the mainstream media about his lack of experience in government, which amounted to 1/3 of one term as a Senator -- nothing else. Instead, they drilled Sarah Palin to death about HER lack of experience, in the unlikely event she would succeed to the presidency -- and she wasn't the one running for president. At least she had some real experience running something in government. (Please don't misunderstand me. Sarah Palin has a lot of questionable qualities too, but she still had more governmental experience than Obama, and they said little if anything negative about him).
If Barack Obama had been a white Republican Baptist first-term senator running for president, the press would have had a field day with him and his lack of experience. Instead, they totally glossed over that and fawned over him like the new Messiah.
The press isn't liberal? Give me a break.
And where were they during the 8 years of Bush? Giving a bunch of criminals the free reign to start wars resulting in the death of thousands of this country's finest? Furthermore, the war provided a perfect distraction for the very changes in the financial system that are such a hot topic on this blog.
If it wasn't for LIBERAL/LEFTIST blogs much of what the Repugs did for almost two decades in power would never have been revealed.
Check the facts. Isn't that what ZeroHedge is about.