I fail to see why journalists are in an uproar about bloggers being
marked as distinct from journalists. Clearly bloggers are not held to
the same standards and to include them in your ranks dilutes the
*ahem* reputation that journalists have. In many cases, companies and
politicians share information off the record with journalists - and
that relationship is maintained because journalists know they'll lose
access if they break confidence. Bloggers just don't give a shit and
will "print" anything they want, rarely holding back sensitive information.
I like having bloggers - it makes life interesting. Journalists,
however, seem to have their priorities mixed up by willingly
associating themselves with bloggers and ultimately hurting their own profession.
What makes bloggers interesting is that they'll print what journalists
won't - because they don't have editors telling them they're crossing
Dan Gilmor has built up 25 years of trust with his sources and
probably has a reasonable understanding of what is publishable and
what is not - but he's no longer a journalist in the traditional
definition - maybe just a trusted blogger. Apple would seek discovery
of his sources if he were to publish the same information as Jason
Ogrady (powerpage) but he would never publish this information! He
wouldn't get into the same fix! How can he be in such an uproar when
what they did clearly supported the violation of trade secrets?
I'm 25 and have been following some of these sites since their
inception and I am capable of recognizing the difference between
journalism and whatever it is that bloggers post.
disclosure: I did once work for Apple, but am no apologist for them.