Required Reading: Are blogs now just a regular part of the reporting process?
Over in my little corner of the world, the city of
But when this story came out one local blogger bemoaned the fact Globe reporters "don’t read blogs," and then cited several problems in the reporting. This brought up an interesting question about bloggers: is it now required for reporters to read bloggers' thoughts as a general part of their reporting?
One of my early journalism lessons was to not trust the phone. Yes, you can do an interview over the phone and it's very convenient, but nothing beats face-to-face interaction, since you can see a subject shift in their seat and watch their face. Conversations are different in person.
One reason for this is described very well by New York Times Sports Reporter Jack Curry in a conversation with Mets' Pitching Coach Rick Peterson.
During my interview with Peterson, the discussion drifted into the subtle ways that a pitcher could tip off his pitches. Peterson used my behavior to help explain his point.
"When you take notes, your head tilts to the right," Peterson said. "But, when you listen to what I'm saying, your head tilts to the left. Wouldn't that be a shame if that tipped someone off to what you were doing?"
Peterson made me think: Do I carry my notebook differently when I have a scoop? Do I keep my pen in a different pocket if I think I have some exclusive information? I was impressed with Peterson's attention to detail.
The other part of the question is when listening to bloggers, who are you listening to? Is it just the loudest part of the population or are the thoughts espoused truly indicative of those of he broader population? Turning back to
A few years ago I worked with a professor who had an interesting theory about online forums. In his paper “Strategic Manipulation of Internet Opinion Forums: Implications for Consumers and Firms,” Chrysanthos Dellarocas made the broad point that corporate manipulation of online forums is a good thing because people automatically assume that some is going on anyway, so they discount the information they're reading. Companies that are not engaging in this kind of manipulation are doing a disservice to themselves, but also to the readers, since intentional manipulation serves to create a greater separation between the positives and negatives of any given discussion. Stephen Baker at BusinessWeek.com wrote about this as well.
It's an interesting theory. But the end result is this: reporters do use blogs as part of their reporting and, in some way, it's going to influence them. The goal is to be part of the conversation not only to reach customers, partners, employees, competitors and the general public, but also to reach the reporters' audience as well.
Posted by Chuck Tanowitz on February 27, 2008 at 9:07 AM
