Blogging Brands

Rettberg’s article, “Blogging Brands” offers insight regarding different forms of advertising utilized by bloggers, and the positive and negative aspects of each.

Until my Digital Communications class, I honestly did not know that some people blogged professionally.  Blogging as a career, with a salary was a completely foreign concept to be.  For someone to “bring home the bacon” just by writing for free online was confusing to me.  If anyone may blog, then how can people possibly make a living off it?  Then of course, it came to me – everything made sense – these bloggers use advertising.

Blogs that get a lot of traffic, naturally, can be supported by advertising.  It is up to the bloggers themselves to determine what types of ads they are comfortable with – some prefer small ads on the sidebar of the blog, some like banner ads, and some, use sponsored ads.

If we’re being completely honest (and I promise to always be honest on my blog!) I am not completely on board with the idea of blogger using advertisements.  Rettberg puts my perspective perfectly in her assertion on page 138:

Blogging is an unregulated area, and this is the sort of question that shows that blogging is not simply a form of journalism.  It is not clear whether blogging should follow the rules of mainstream media about separating editorial content from sponsored content, and even if there were an agreement about this, there would be no way to make bloggers follow it.  J.D. Lasica argues straight out that a blogger who wishes to be thought of as a journalist cannot post sponsored entries.

I am of the feeling that bloggers who post about specific products or companies for payment, are not necessarily being true to themselves, to their blogs, or to their audiences.  It would frustrate me to follow a blog that suddenly gained significant-enough traffic to where the author decided to start posting about random products.  I don’t choose to read blogs to be made to feel like a consumer.  I read blogs because I like what the author posts.  Once the author begins posting sponsored ads, it may not be the blog it used to be, and I may not like it as much as I did before.

I have less of a problem with sponsored ads if the authors completely disclose that they are paid to write reviews of particular products, etc.  After all, “truth and integrity are at the core of both the success stories and the failures of commercial blogging,” so if the author of a blog does not disclose this information to his or her readers and then is later found out, it is extremely likely that the author will have lost all credibility (Rettberg 153).  In fact, they definitely lose credibility for me.

So my questions are, do blog authors lose credibility for you when they start allowing advertisements on their pages?  What about when they participate in sponsored blogging?  At what point would an author lose your interest because of advertising on his or her blog page?

Are Bloggers Journalists?

Are bloggers journalists?

It is a question I have taken on before, but after reading Rettberg’s article, “Citizen Journalists” and Rosenstiel’s “Journalism of Verification,” I feel more qualified to take a stab at the question.

This entire debate began with the start of the Internet.  As Internet use progressed, the “blogosphere,” as it is called, opened up.  There has always been freedom of the press, but, as Rettberg puts it, “The Internet changed one of the greatest obstacles to true freedom of the press . . . . by the end of the century, bloggers could, in effect, own a press” (85). 

Suddenly, there is no longer a need to be published in a magazine or newspaper to spread news.  Someone with the details about an event doesn’t have to phone tip the local news station.  Instead, anyone with news, or anything to say for that matter, can with the click of a mouse.

So the question is again, is this journalism?

My answer remains that no, it is not.  Bloggers can be journalists, in some instances, but all bloggers are not journalists because they blog, and similarly, blogging is not necessarily journalism.  Here is what Rettberg identifies as the main difference: “You call yourself a journalist if you work as a journalist” (89). 

Rosensteil takes this concept to an even deeper, but very simplified level.  He says, “the essence of journalism is a discipline of verification” (71). 

In my opinion, that is a fantastic way to explain the difference between journalism and blogging.  Rosensteil elaborates by explaining, “in the end, the discipline of verification is what separates journalism from entertainment, propaganda, fiction, or art” (79).

Journalists are professional writes.  They adhere to their professions code of ethics.  They answer to superiors in the publishing industry, regardless of the medium.  Journalists have accountability.  They must always, verify their information, their sources, their facts.  They must be transparent.

My questions for discussion are, aside from the reasons listed above, are there any other ways to separate bloggers from journalists?  And additionally, when exactly does a blogger become a journalist?

From Oral Com to the Blogosphere

The emergence of mass media had a tremendous, multi-tiered effect on mass communication. 

Prior to the distribution of mass media, information could not be spread as readily, as widely, or as easily.  Even before this was the emergence of print – another phenomenon that allowed for a significant shift in the absorption and spread of information.

I find all of this particularly interesting as it pertains to blogging, because throughout my lifetime, I have progressed from simply speaking words (starting at eleven months old), to writing words on paper (preschool and kindergarten), to typing on a desktop computer (age five), to sending emails (age eleven), and now, to joining the blogosphere.  How fascinating the impact of blogging becomes when I look back at these progressions over time - especially when I think about how in my lifetime alone, these technological advancements were made.

My favorite part of the piece “From Bards to Blogs” in Chapter 2 of Rettberg's work was his speculation about what Plato might have thought about blogging.  Rettberg says, “Plato complains that a written text is basically unresponsive” (32), but goes onto explain how Plato likely would have appreciated blogs because they allow the audience a unique opportunity to respond to what is written, and in the same way, allow the author of the piece to respond to audience’s comments.

I also appreciated the section of the piece entitled “The Late Age of Print” which described the ownership that authors can now take with their pieces, that before, songs, plays, and stories were dictated orally, and thus changed with every performer.  Now, however, with the effects of publishing, the words and stories and characters within a book belong to its author, and its author alone.

Chapter 3 of Rettberg’s work, “Blogs, Communities, and Networks” describes the role of the blogger as a writer, and also the role that blogs play within the new, virtual public sphere.  Three points in particular stood out to me in this piece: first, that blogs serve a social purpose in the public sphere; that the authors of blogs are looking for followers to read and comment on their work, and also that blogs serve as a form of social media, that can be highly criticized.  Second, the fact that as a result of the first point, no blog can be created equal.  The blogger for an editorial New York Times blog is not necessarily looking to be (and likely never will be) equivalent to a personal blog or a food blog.  Third, the fact that blog posts typically remain accessible on the Internet for significant periods of time, and thus discussions can continue well after a topic that is blogged about has become stale.

Among these points, I was most interested in the section that described the social media role of blogs.  Is this a good thing?  Is it beneficial to the public sphere to have people willing to share their entire lives online?  What are the potential positive and negative effects of blogging?

Headlines, Hyperlinks, and the Hot Debate: Are Bloggers Journalists?

We’ve all heard it before: Don’t judge a book by its cover.  But do we?  Of course.

In the same way, we all judge news stories by their headlines.  And why shouldn’t we?  The purpose of the headline is, after all, to draw readers in, to encourage them to take the time to read the full text story.

A great headline can combat a “scanner,” drawing him or her in to begin a story.  If the heading and headers are strong as well, the scanner might even read an entire story, which is what journalists hope for.

The job of a headline may seem almost too simple - it is, first and foremost, the title of an article.  It seeks to inform, not to entertain.  It doesn’t need to be cute and catchy; it needs to be striking and interesting.  It also needs to properly summarize the article it precedes.

Additionally, headlines also serve the important job of helping readers to figure out what not read – a job of huge importance within the wealth of information available online and in newspapers and magazines.  Headlines help readers to determine what to invest their time in.

Another hugely important aspect of articles is hyperlinking.  I confess, hyperlinking is not an aspect of online journalism that I had ever thought twice about.  But in thinking about it now, it is a huge opportunity for writers to inform our readers.  Even more so, it is an opportunity to gain reader credibility, by establishing with the click of a mouse, a chance for readers to make even more sense of what an article is trying to tell them.  

However, I am still curious as to when exactly it is appropriate to use hyperlinking as a resource?  Is it acceptable to use in the middle of an article?

Vastly different from simply online journalism or print news sources websites, lies the “blogosphere,” which provides another opportunity for readers to be educated, persuaded, and informed.  Blogs are at their very core, another form of journalism.  They offer perspective.  They are a trend that is catching on more and more as time progresses because at the very heart of blogs is opportunity – anyone can blog. 

However, the content and information varies enormously from blog to blog.  Some are simply personal blogs – think Julie Powell’s blog in the Meryl Streep and Amy Adams movie Julie and Julia.  Other blogs, like the editorials for The New York Times and The Washington Post are based out of classic, reputable print news sources.

In my heart of hearts though, I question whether or not bloggers are true journalists.  As someone who hopes to become a print journalist, I have a distinctly particular view of bloggers.  Bloggers are writers, I certainly agree, but are they journalists?  I have to say no.  The job of a journalist, in my opinion, is an ethical, moral obligation to an audience – to inform them.  To produce the facts.  To conduct interviews.  To present the truth in an unbiased way.  Journalists are required to adhere to a code of ethics – bloggers can write whatever they want.  I see the two as inherently unequal.

I pose the above question for discussion – do you think bloggers are journalists as well?  Why or why not?