Ruff, ruff

Ruff, ruff

: Yes, I bark. But my bite is worse.

That’s a sly link to Jack Shafer’s Slate column about last week’s Harvard journalism/ blogging confab and hooha.

Ed Cone is right: Shafer’s column is pretty clueless.

: Jay Rosen assigned the class around the table to write up what changed their mind at the conference. Collective blatherings here.

: LATER: Rosen takes down Shafer… hard.

Besides being lazy, Jack Shafer

  • FYI for those who don’t click through the links: That Shafer quote about “blogs will triumph … you guys are toast!” is not actually a quote from Shafer, but a paraphrase from Rosen.

  • Dishman

    My own take on the Shafer piece (from an e-mail I kicked him):
    You wrote:
    The bloggers certainly weren’t going to get much lip from me. I saddled up with the new media posse back in 1996, and much of what I do

  • FYI update: The quotation marks have been removed, and the passage has been labeled as a paraphrase.

  • Tom

    While I agree that there is a level of “missing the point” in the column, the one point he drives home – smartly, even – is that the triumphalism as “beall, endall” by some bloggers needs to take a vacation. Yes, it’s changing things, yes, it’s opening doors – but it’s not replacing media as we know it anytime soon, and will only operate in a complementary manner – for the moment, at least. That’s not to say that blogs, like this one and many others, don’t do original reporting, because they do – but there comes a time and place for everything.

  • ed

    “I recently tore apart The Times’ Sarah Boxer story about the Iraqi bloggers”
    Enough with the bragging already!

  • I’d respectfully suggest your own silence on Zeyad’s cousin-drowning story was far longer and more inexplicable than the Times re his Baghdad demonstration story: might be time to find a different example of media bias than the one Shafer has you citing, once again.

  • I must have read something different because the point I got from the Slate article was simply to not overhype a new medium and accept that change is often incorporated into woolly institutions like The Media.
    I also got that Dave Winer was being his usual self and perhaps Jeff got a wee bit excited at one point.
    The transcripts Shafer points to in his article seem to back up his claims which, again I must say, didn’t seem to be negative about blogs at all, just about the importance of seeing change as an inclusive process not necessarily as a revolutionary one.
    The follow up from other people doesn’t match what I would have expected from the article and the paraphrasing and accusations of dishonesty seem over the top. Is this oversensitivity and bias or some different reality being discussed? I’m not sure.
    In the end you know what: it doesn’t matter.
    As much as Jeff, Dave etc like conferences, confrontations, hyperbole and lofty proclamations the thing they don’t seem to get is they don’t matter to the medium of blogging. They only matter to the old media they decry so much because they are the ones who seek out “opinion leaders” (blah) to digest the real story of blogging.
    Most real people don’t give a crap what Dave Winer or Jeff Jarvis think about blogs vs. old media. And yes I presume to speak for “real people” based on statistical (as well as anecdotal) evidence. And that is not meant as disrespect to Mr. Jarvis’ talents but it is just a reality of the new medium where Mr. Jarvis is no greater or worse than many others.
    The one unfair comment in the Slate article is the evocation of Lenin in the context of ideology and technology forming a revolution. I don’t believe the Internet (forget Blogs) allows for such egomaniacal leadership. A single person taking ownership of such a paradigm shift is impossible in the decentralised structure of the Net. At best they contribute a little bit to it all.
    As proof take Mr. Winer’s continued behaviour. If ever there was a Lenin-type figure it would be him but his irrelevance would make Trotsky chuckle. And again his contribution is to be lauded even if his ego is to be mocked.

  • Dishman

    I believe Seyed and I are in general agreement. Further, I believe it is fair to say that Shafer agreed with at least part of my e-mail to him.
    perhaps Jeff got a wee bit excited at one point.
    Perhaps that wouldn’t be the first time.

  • Bruce: I wrote about that tragedy more than once.

  • Hey Jarvis, you won an award! It’s good to see you getting the kind of recognition you deserve, ol’ buddy.