Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

I'm not blogging this, mark my words

CHRISTIE BLATCHFORD

From Thursday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 8:44 AM EST 22/08/08

With 20,000 journalists in the same approximate place, it is impossible to overlook the phenomenon ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. R M from Canada writes: Great post, Christie! I am glad I found your blog, finally a blogger who knows how to write. Keep up the good work, and please post more often if you can.
  2. Xiao Ping Deng from Canada writes: Welcome to the new world order, Christie, where facts don't matter -- only opinion -- and there's certainly no point in doing any research or spending time on crafting an argument when everyone's personal knee-jerk reaction to an event is just as good as the next and always better than something thought-out or supported by facts! In fact, that old-school approach is just intellectual arrogance or colonial thinking. One word of caution, however: don't say anything bad about China, as China is always right! There's your hierarchical model; can you work in it?
  3. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    Yeah, and I suspect Christie still curses the advent of television. "With radio, you made pictures with your mind, and they were as beautiful as your imagination would allow"...blah blah blah say the old-timers.

    Geting old and falling behind is a curse indeed.
  4. Out of Toronto, finally from Montréal, Canada writes: OMG, the Globe is still paying this person money ...
  5. André Clément from Sudbury ON, Canada writes: Well said, er, written, posted or blogged Christie. You are absolutely right. But what can or should be done about the distillation of journalistic quality? We web-responders don't have the abilities you highlighted and there is a lot of chaff. But some good thoughts fall out of all that chaff - which are likely lost because it will take some commercial or academic journalistic researcher to tease out the public's preferrences and leanings. All that data is or will be fertile ground for opinion readers. Big Brother may be watching or the social scientists may be helping government dunderheads to shape more appropriate policies. What interesting times we live in.
  6. Erika H from Canada writes: Lovely article, and it does provide some interesting perspective knowing that writers only have half a dozen minutes, if that, before submitting an article.

    I disagree, however, with the her disapproval of comments. Yes, a number of comments or responses to article elicit a barrage of discussions (which can be healthy, though when they digress to petty name calling, can be rather tedious). A number of comments sometimes provide additional insight that the author of the article did not write on - whether because they didn't bother thoroughly researching, or alternatively, weren't granted the necessary research time. I appreciate such comments, especially when they all but negate the article in question. Useful when trying to paint a broader picture of the world around us. :)
  7. Billiam Smith from Montreal, Canada writes: "You see? Everyone's a writer now. Everyone's an editor. It's as if the College of Physicians and Surgeons not only encouraged patients to read all the medical websites, but also to do their own diagnoses."

    You mean mere readers aren't allowed to dare comment on the written work of their betters? Get out of the ivory tower. Newspaper writing has long been sub-par (yours is a rare exception) and readers are starting to get tired of being fed hastily-written pap. The days of the eight-martini journalist are past - we can get poor writing anywhere on the Internet. All we ask is that newspapers be better.
  8. Casual Observer from Ridgetown, Canada writes: Blogs, conversations, reader opinions, letters to the editor, etc. What's the attraction? For the mass of unknowns it simply means: "I comment, therefore I am".
  9. Al Maloney from United States writes: Christie
    You and Xiao Ping Deng are right on!
    You've hit the nail on the head ;)

    One question - were the Luddites or the saboteurs the first ecoterrorists?

    Al Maloney
  10. Hannah Logan from Canada writes: "He was committing his most idle thoughts and mundane observations if not to paper, then to its modern equivalent, a blog."

    Ironic criticism from a reporter who, over the years, has subjected her readers to page after page after page of verbose prose ABOUT HER DOG.
  11. Donald Wilson from Canada writes: Your Blog reads like a story - good . Too many of the " stories " printed in Newspapers today are not a reporting of the facts but are mostly the writers personal opinion , and often containg mis-spelling , poor grammer , and " facts " that some of us know to be wrong . Every editor that allows this in his/her newspaper just reduces the esteem of that paper . And they wonder why it is difficult to sell newspapers . If it were not for the few good writers / journalist in print it would be a waste of time and money buying a printed newspaper today . Some of the G & M writers are just plain awful - showing a lack of education and knowledge . It is no wonder that persons commenting write such agressive responses .
    Opinion stories belong in a section entitled " Journalist Opinions " . And Editors don't appear to be editing these days , so what is it they do ?
    Keep up the good work - and enjoy .
  12. handy andy from burlington, Canada writes: One of my great pleasures is reading good columnists (of every stripe) and you are among the best. The enormous amount of comment, good and bad you all generate is now available everywhere whereas it was restricted in the past to the dinner table or round the bar. Is that bad? But I have two questions for you - do you read the comments your columns generate? And do you take any notice of them? I have many times thrown out an idea for a future column or asked for a clarification of a column and have never yet seen anything from any of you which suggests the answer to either of these question is yes!
  13. Take an Extra Sweater from Tirana, writes:
    Blogging.... it used to be called "keeping a diary" I believe, but with the Internet's voracious appetite and infinite capacity to swallow "content", what previously were one's private and often unliterary, premature and unripened views, opinions and observations are now what's HOT.

    NOT! Don't worry Christie. It will pass eventually, and journalism, like history, will prevail.
  14. Peter Lambert from Toronto, Canada writes: Thoughtful writers will always find thoughtful readers and vice-versa, though the way they find each other may change. Courage, Ms. Blatchford--your thoughtful writing will always be appreciated.
  15. Gila Martow from Toronto, Canada writes: Christie, you forgot the most important point (or was it intentional?): you don't get paid to blog so why would you give away witty comments for free?!

    Like so many others, I became a wannabe columnist when an issue that was important to me was ignored and then misrepresented by major publications, including the Globe. I have to say that the Globe was nice enough to publish my piece on the web version two years back (Google Gila Gladstone-Martow if you're curious) while other publications printed some of my efforts. Di Manno is still my idol even though she never did address my issue in print.
  16. joseph Cheng from Toronto, Canada writes: Blatchford! Your column is still banal. You can add this to your self-confessed banal columns!
  17. Todd Mac from Nova Scotia, Canada writes: Well I didn't think too much of the article; but I did find some of the comments very interesting, entertaining and insightful.
  18. Jason Offet from Toronto, Canada writes: This critique could have been shorter and more concise in a blog. Having the space to write more doesn't mean one necessarily should.

    As has been commented above, this article smacks of the kind of criticism that newspaper journalists leveled against TV news in the early days.

    Had hoped for more from The Globe. Disappointing.
  19. MN Smith from Bermuda writes: Christie - you had me at "our girl Karla". A true columnist.
  20. a s from Mississauga, Canada writes: Yes, Ms Blatchford. You are right. Everyone is a writer and an editor. This, unfortunately is the new world of journalism. Welcome to it.

    If you have any problems with this new world order, there's the exit and don't let it hit you. Bye now.
  21. Nate San Francesco from Toronto, Canada writes: There is nothing quite so depressing as reading the comments after any article online. Proof positive that democracy is wasted on its constituents. Such ignorant, bitter, ill-informed and all-round awful people we all are when we feel we can comment on something online. If we met someone on the street, we would be polite. [Heck, we're Canadian, eh?] But online, we just start lacing into the journalists, their subject matter, and the other commenting readers as if our very survival depended on being as rude and abrasive as possible.

    Even the internet wasn't like this originally, and I believe this is one aspect of the phenomenon to which Ms Blatchford is drawing our attention. Even 10 years ago there was a certain degree of anti-flaming shaming going on. Now, it's accepted. Stand there behind your cloak of anonymity and start hurling rocks.

    Democracy should be taken away from the people. We don't deserve it. We comment on "mis-spelling , poor grammer [sic]", and we get out the big knives to hack away at someone making a fairly inoffensive (but valid) point.

    The sooner the Globe shuts down its online commenting tools, the sooner we can go back to believing in the underlying decency of humankind.
  22. Overtaxed and underlaid from Canada writes: Christie (and Rosie): Get those CV's into the Economist, the last bastion of journalism today.

    That, or just give in and tell us about your breakfast this morning.
  23. Michael Bunte from Canada writes: I know that I was most surprised when there was this huge uproar by the Olympic media about there not being free access to the Internet in China. Why were these journalists being send to China if they were just going to spend their time browsing the internet? Should they not be talking to the people, going on site to report on events? I am probably not unlike other people that I do not find the time to even read the daily paper and tend to digest daily headlines on the Internet. Frankly some of the material that newspapers publish is not much better than the responses posted by readers. However, I think there is still space for something like a weekly editorial newspaper that provides well researched objective reporting. In fact we need something like that to help us put all the week's headlines and shouting into perspective. And i for one would enjoy sitting down once a week to relax with a cup of tea and read good journalism that does not make me my blood boil but makes me think instead.
  24. James McCourt from Toronto, Canada writes: Christie, I think I love you.

    Nate San Francesco, if it were possible to agree with you 110%, I would. I'm going to settle for 100%.
  25. My Thoughts from Waterloo, Canada writes: Even the comments here illustrate the variety of experiences and expectations.

    Some want a verbally illustrated story, some want concise facts, some want a conversation, and everyone expects all of this from their favourite web site, rather than taking time to find a web site that provides that. It just another piece of the all about me era, of course without the individual accountability.

    With the demands of producing content as frequently as possible, it is a reality that the quality of much of that content is quite low, and often incorrect (or unaware). Even if you care for quality, one would quickly sink into obscurity under the volumes of crap that gets produced out there --- which is ironic because in many cases, that content gets the feeling of being cut an paste from somewhere else or served up by companies marketting something.

    I like the new world... it just seems to me that both authors and commentors are talking just for the sake of talking, all a bit pointless and empty. But my solution is to quit reading it (kind of like turning off the TV). I know it doesn't help you pay your bills, but it does save my soul (and my time)
  26. leo bloom from radisson, sask, canada, Canada writes: I agree with Hannah Logan...woof-woof Christie ; ) ...Tom Stoppard once said that a journalist is 'someone who flies around from hotel to hotel and thinks the most interesting thing about any story is the fact that he [she] has arrived to cover it.' You should chew that over Ms Blatchford. As for you Nate - there is nothing quite so depressing as reading the comments of a puffed-up, brown-nosed, patsy...the Globe comment sections have nothing to do with the 'decency of humankind'...you've had too much Dr Phil my son...
  27. Interested Observer from United States writes: Well written Nate -appologies to Christie. I would add the mix about journalistic integrity missinf from blogs and blogs being 'op ed'. Ms. Blatchford allowed her bias to support the war in Afghanistan without regard to the true root origins. Christie rallies the troops and juxtaposes honesty and integrity and Canada's noble history as the 'honest broker' comingled now with nefarious war lords and tribal loyalty. The self confessed den mother could do some real journalism and corrolate the illegal unjust occupation of an illiterate backwater nation of goat herders with the new world order and Canada's compility. Cream rises to the top when churrned. I only have a finite number of words I can read.
  28. Glenn F from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Difference between a blogger and a columnist? Paycheque.
  29. Freddy Sanon from Ottawa, Canada writes: Interestingly, during my time at Ryerson's j-school, we were exhorted to write as much as possible to stay sharp...
  30. Dave Miller from Montreal, Canada writes: I hope the Globe writers don't actually read these comment sections. At least not from their own articles. Some of the most ignorant, pointless, hurtful drivel I've ever read has been in these comment sections.
  31. Dave Miller from Montreal, Canada writes: @Freddy Sanon.

    Were you also encouraged to publish everything you wrote in anyway possible?

    During my time studying writing I was told to write a lot everyday.....and then sift through it for the good stuff.
  32. Alan Burke from ClimateChange.dynalias.com, Canada writes: Nate, this is not a true blog. It has acute amnesia and an unenforced posting policy (with rare exceptions).

    Most blogs do not charge you an arm and a leg to read what was said before. Most are moderated. Not semi-moderated in a rarely-enforced and technically crippled medium, which this is.

    Most are focused. Not here. Posting a link to a relevant external source is painful and subject to wierd syntax rules. Don't dare to use and underscore or asterisk. You're at risk if you do.

    If this forum, Christie, is how you judge "blogs", then you have much to learn.

    An old fart who knows technology,
    Alan
  33. Dan Waller from Montreal, Canada writes: It is certain that people's connectivity to the global community has improved significantly since the popularization of the internet as a forum for news gathering and discussion. We expect today's news today and want to provide our own perspective on what we read in comment forums like this.

    Christie, your story reeks of nostalgia for a time that is now clearly past. It is an inarguable fact that professionally trained and experienced journalists are best suited to craft a news story, but the success of blogs clearly indicates that most people will gladly forego the literary finesse in order to have the facts in hand sooner. Moreover, your implied annoyance at the ease with which people can now respond and comment on your professional crafted diatribes only serves to date you further.

    If the realities of the way the internet has changed the face of journalism, and communication in general, then perhaps it's time to start cashing in on those RRSPs and pensions funds you must surely have squirrelled away. I apologize if this response comes across as a terse denunciation of the fine art of journalism practised by your generation of reporter because it was certainly not intended as such. It's just that times have changed and so must you, otherwise move over and let someone else (who's willing to blog and accept comment forums) take your place.
  34. Darrin Duell from Winnipeg, Canada writes: A thought provoking article. I can't speak for all commenters, but often times I race through reading the article, so that I can have some time to read the comments. Certainly, all comments are not as insightful, but oftentimes there are some very intelligent responses, I agree with Erika H on her points.

    When people respond to comments they are offering up a snapshot to their worldview. For someone who is curious about what people think and who also likes to challenge their own ideas and beliefs good comments are a gift.
  35. Alan Burke from ClimateChange.dynalias.com, Canada writes: There is a huge divide, still, between journalists and reality.

    It is nowhere more evident that in articles about climate change (global warming being one of the aspects).

    Amnesia is rampant among journalists. Scientists don't know how to get their evidence across.

    It's all about the "now", not what's important.

    The fault lies on both sides - journalists need to blow away their schedules and sound bites and scientists need to frame ideas in memorable and verifiable terms.

    But there are other players. They are not usually interested in objectivity.
  36. R. C. from TORONTO, Canada writes: I so agree with Ms. Blatchford. I mean, she's getting paid to write a column so why waste time on a blog? There's a book out called "Enough" in which the writer says there's only so much information we can take in and I'm a news junkie! It all started when I was a researcher for CBC TV.
    Please keep writing, articles, that is....
  37. Randal Oulton from Toronto, Canada writes: >> Out of Toronto, finally from Montréal, Canada writes: OMG, the Globe is still paying this person money ...

    There is some as what would pay good money not to hear from you.
  38. Spencer C from Canada writes: I'm not sure why I'm writing this because it is clear Ms. Blatchford would never stoop so low as to consort with the commoners by reading online comments.

    Nonetheless, I can't help but wonder how Ms. Blatchford felt when the printing press replaced ink and scroll or when radio arrived, clearly these inventions ruined the fine tuned art of communication that was practiced at the time.

    This article reeks of elitism and is quite frankly an insult to many trained, professional journalists who actively embrace blogging and see it an an evolution of journalism, not a abomination.

    For every seasoned, well-trained journalist at a paper like the Globe there is a hack at a tabloid somewhere, old-style journalism is no more immune to trash than blogging is.

    There are just as many great bloggers, and commenters, out there as there are (or were) newspaper journalists. Using the worst traits of blogging to lift your dying craft up just shows that you are so desperate to save yourself that you will abandon the pillars of good reporting just to make a point.

    I could just as easily write a column comparing well written, thoughtful blogs to trashy British tabloids.

    Lashing out at anything that is new and different is a clear sign that your ability to provide relevant, coherent commentary is almost up.
  39. Melissa T from Italy writes: "It is not true that anyone can write. It is not true that anyone can write on deadline. It is not true that anyone can do an interview. It is not true that anyone can edit themselves and sort wheat from chaff."

    Of course not. And the democratization of the web means we can choose who to read and who not to read; we can choose which ones are writers and which ones aren't by giving feedback - by letting you know, hey, Christie, this was a bad article... or hey, Christie, this is great work.

    "And journalism wasn't meant to be a conversation, anyway. It was maybe a monologue, at its most democratic a carefully constructed dialogue."

    I'm not sure how you can say that it's a monologue; it makes journalists seem like mindless tools. Maybe in a lot of ways, many journalists are mindless tools. But if you don't believe your articles are conversations, then maybe you're missing the point - as soon as your audiences read your story, it becomes their story. Writing is an art form, and art imitates life, and life imitates art, and so on and so on. Isn't that what a news story is - somebody ELSE'S story, important enough to enough people that it is newsworthy?

    "If readers didn't like or agree with the monologues in paper A, they bought paper B. What was most important about their opinions was that they thought enough to spend the coin."

    Once again, today, if readers don't like Blog A, they move on to Blog B. It's exactly the same situation, except feedback is instantaneous and direct; that's the core of social media. Welcome to the 21st century's purported Web 2.0.

    By the way, you're excellent at your craft, and I always enjoy your stories, even if I don't agree with them. DiManno churning out her superfluous amount of content doesn't reflect the point of blogging. Maybe she thinks quantity wins over quality. She should know nobody's listening anymore 'cos we're bored to DEATH. Thank you for choosing quality, Ms. Blatchford.
  40. Done and Done from Canada writes: Well said, Ms Blatchford.
  41. Stephen Duke from Vancouver, Canada writes:
    Very George Costanza of you Blatch. A piece about nothing.

    Therefore, and in the spirit of your protest. I have no comment worth posting in such an "ephemeral" forum.
  42. Gogh Forit from Canada writes: Blog.....sounds like something stuck in a toilet.
  43. Alan Burke from Canada writes: Melissa, bravo.
  44. Christa Bedwin from Calgary, Canada writes: One of my highest compliments is to call someone a good thinker, Christie, which I think you are... and your comments about blogging are so similar to what I wrote about parenting on my blog (which I have tried to keep more thoughtful and less banal, though I can't say ultimately I've totally succeeded) this morning, that I just had to copy your two last paragraphs onto the blog... thereby doing just what you object to, smearing your words all over cyberspace... but it's the new world of writing.

    http://web.mac.com/powerparent/ThePowerofSoloParenting/Blog/Entries/2008/8/21ScreamingFitsandLaundry.html

    Christa
  45. - TheDigression.com - from Victoria, Canada writes: Simple solution Christie: work freelance and don't blog. There's little chance of the parasite replacing the dog.
  46. robert tyrie from Toronto, Canada writes: Ms. Blatchford:

    Your article is personal and an opinion, just like a blog entry in a news paper, albeit edited . Which is fine. Why bother arguing with the "new" newspapers. People value information and will read it, just like when news was posted with telegrams -stop- The most disquieting thing you've done in your essay way lay out a set of personal fears and laid an awful defense. "Journalism is not a conversation". That indeed would be a shame if journalists no longer listened to the world as well as speak to it.

    Beware of becoming a monologue-ist, your only self-delusion will be you won't know when people stop listening to you.

    Rob
  47. S Muhlberger from North Bay, Canada writes: You should be glad that your comments don't include a single one denouncing Pierre Trudeau's immigration policies for wrecking Canada.
  48. Agora Com from Blogville, Canada writes: "The thing that I know, as all the editors I have had also know, is what I didn't get to confide or write or commit to paper, because someone else had the good sense to put on the brakes."

    Christie, it is unfortunate that your "brakes" didn't get to you before this post. History (and you) will judge this as one of your worst pieces ever.
  49. Alan Burke from Canada writes: Christa, I'd love to read your story but it has probably been mangled here.

    I've created links many times before for we who care to comment. I have also complained to the G&M about their editorial and practical postings.

    For Christie to say otherwise only shows her ignorance.

    This board is dysfunctional. In spite of years of criticism. I can show evidence.

    Don't rely upon this medium to give you a fair and memorable hearing.

    Christie, adjust to reality. The Web was invented for discovery, not opinion.
  50. Tom h from Edmonton, Canada writes: leo bloom: Congratulations on both missing and proving Nate San Francesco's point in a single comment. I wouldn't have thought it possible.
  51. Werner George Patels from Calgary, Canada writes: I agree with Blatchford when she quotes a sportswriter as saying that there is only a finite number of words in a writer. No matter how creative you are, eventually you will run out of things to write about, or ways in which to arrange your words on any given subject. Since 95% of (political) bloggers (particularly in Canada) have a very poor command of the English language, they will marginalize themselves over time, burn out and end up in Page Not Found Error Hell. Regardless, there really is no difference between what a professional newspaper columnist does in print and what a professional web columnist such as myself produces online – except for the paycheque. So, even though the percentage of lousy and ephemeral bloggers is so high as to almost allow for generalizations, I would appreciate it if the mainstream media people, like Ms. Blatchford, took a more balanced (and objective) view of us "web columnists". I don't really consider myself a blogger, therefore, because that would lump me in with the chaff. Unfortunately, we, the web columnists, are only a tiny, tiny fraction of the blogosphere, but it is we who keep the blogosphere going, because without us web columnists, there would be no quality to speak of and the blogosphere would have died a long time ago.
  52. Ed Long from Canada writes: When I was in Grade XIII, that is an "8", every Friday we were required to bring the local paper to school and we spent the afternoon analyzing it.

    We were taught the difference between a news story and an editorial. We examined how the pages were physically laid out balancing text with advertisements and how the sections of the paper were put together and the importance of specific columns on specific subjects. We even learned how to read the stock charts and, not necessarily related, the obituaries and classified ads.

    The "art" of putting together a newspaper is gone as is the "art" of reading it.

    The ultimate result of mass democratization of information and education is that we redefine the lowest common denominator and go there.

    It's evolution, I guess.
  53. D M from Canada writes: To Donald Wilson: As you seem to be very concerned about the lack of editing at the Globe and the level of education and knowledge of the writers, I think you should know the following about your own comment: You spelled "containing", "grammar", and "aggressive" incorrectly; your first use of the word "journalist" should have been pluralized; and your second use of the word "journalist" should have been either "Journalists'" or "Journalistic".
  54. Robert Lower from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Blatch, nobody says it better than you. And this article connected with me in so many ways. Most regrettable is the lack of editors on the web. For me, this has meant that rather than waste my life searching the sprawling, smelly, bug-infested haystack for the golden needle, I just walk the other way and pretend it's not there. That almost certainly means I'm missing some gems that a good editor would have brought to my attention, but - life's too short. It's the same reason I quit Facebook/Myspace etc. Good ideas, but call me when they've grown up. That's not Luddism, it's discrimination.
  55. Elmer Horst from Canada writes: Ed Long - your lament for the better days lost me after stating that XIII is '8'. Perhaps things haven't changed much after all.....
  56. M Harrison from Toronto, Canada writes: Christie, if it weren't for bloggers, we'd still be in the dark about many things the mainstream media refuses to report on, like for instance the concentration camps for "undesirables" they've set up in China during the Olympics.

    Yes you are upset that there are people willing to report the truth rather than toe the company line that you so-called "real" reporters have to.

    The genie's out of the bottle now, you can't put it back in. The days of the mainstream controlled media are numbered.

    Truth is in blogging.
  57. Jim Roth from Victoria, Canada writes: Sorry Blatch, but you missed the point. Journalism is dead in the mainstream media.

    You may be a "better" writer than the legions of bloggers, but they are allowed to tell the truth.

    The corporate media supplies us with spin and propaganda about things that matter - bloggers can give us actual facts and honest opinion.

    Of course, you can continue to write "better" about anything that doesn't matter.
  58. Ed Long from Canada writes: Elmer ... I did Grade VIII twice.
  59. Toby Maloney from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Anyone can write a blog, but not everyone can write one that a lot of people want to read. As a professional journalist at a quality newspaper, Ms. Blatchford, you should:

    a) be able to tell the difference yourself
    b) credit the rest of us with capacity for critical thinking
    c) not feel so threatened
  60. Judy McAuley from Canada writes: Way to go Cristie - stick to your guns! I would rather read a well-written, amusing, inspiring, piece infrequently than be inundated with too many banal and boring quips.
    Judy, Oakville
  61. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: Like many here, I also find this "article" a bit strange.

    The MSM has lost its interest to a great many because of the severe restrictions that it has placed on its employees.

    I never thought that it would happen in the USA that the entire media would collude to block the expression of ideas by a Presidential candidate because he was saying things that the establishment just didn't want to hear (but were true, nevertheless.)

    BTW If some posters here don't actually like blogs, what are you folks doing on these threads expressing your own opinions ?

    Cheers
  62. Common Sense Matters from Canada writes: Negative article, negative comments. Human nature.
  63. vava kolinski from Toronto, writes: I think a bigger issue plaguing the mainstream media is their definition of "news". This story, in my opinion, is filler at best.
  64. Alan Burke from Canada writes: There is a gargantuan disconnection between those who report the news and those who understand it.

    Journalism has become mere blipverts. Max Headroom's domain. Especially here. In the dysfunctional commentary to G&M articles; this is not a blog.

    Christie, when you can show some depth about science other than your emotional opinion, please comment again but do not pretend that you have authority when it comes to discovery. You can incite but you're not blessed with truth.

    Your realm is opinion; leave us to discovery.If you care to step outside, then be prepared to be challenged but not in this dysfunctional board..
  65. Edmund S from Canada writes: I actually don't see much of a difference between newspaper columnists and bloggers other than that bloggers are not subject to the sober second thought (or political interference, in some cases) of newspaper editors, which is good in some ways, bad in many others. The other similarity between columnists and bloggers is that a good 80% of the stuff they write is total rubbish, except bloggers aren't necessarily getting paid a salary when they are waxing banality. Sometimes I'd rather my subscription money provided the funds needed to run more news items than subsidizing the space of columnists whose invectives I'd rather not read. At least with lousy bloggers I can simply avoid their sites without having paid a cent to subsidize their existence. One of the more exceptional columnists is Christie Blatchford, whose musings I always relish greatly. My feeling is that if she were to start a blog it would actually be one of the better ones, so it is unfortunate she is frosty to the idea. Frankly, for a good writer who is conversant in and clicked into a variety of interesting subjects, a blog offers much more latitude to pursue topics of the writer's choosing and express ideas that are much more controversial without having to worry about offending the tastes of subscribers, advertisers or other interests that tend to encourage self-censorship in the editorial rooms of the country. I can't say that Christie has been censored because her columns in the G&M seem pretty candid (even when they stick a shim in a colleague, which is amusing). So for now, there's no point in starting a blog, but that may be the path of the future, which she may actually be all the better for.
  66. Joyce Bernadette from Calgary, Canada writes: According to google, the Globe and Mail has a daily circulation of 332,800. Last December, there were a reported 112 million active blogs, with numbers growing daily. To imply that you only have a finite amount of words within you and that you, and your journalist friends, must "guard what is left" is one of the saddest statements I have ever heard. Truly gifted writers, the ones I have encountered anyways, view every opportunity to write as a blessing and a joy. Having the opportunity to share that gift with the world is usually met with happiness and feelings of gratitude. Your miserly approach to your words ring with a selfish and slightly insecure tone. I am truly grateful that so many people in this world are writing. I am estatic that millions of people are blogging. You were wrong when you sarcastically noted that everyone is a writer. Not everyone can write. The world as a whole, has a literacy rate of approximately 78%. That means that 12% of the world can't read or write. As a writer, who is lucky enough to have a job that pays her to write - you should be celebrating and encouraging the rest of us to express ourselves through the written word. Your criticisms were most unwelcome. The readers here, that you have so eloquently insulted - we are the ones spending the coins to buy the paper that signs your paycheques. I would advise that you work a bit harder to maintain that professionalism that you indicate only real journalists have by getting off your whiny little soap box and perhaps start writing about something real and important. But maybe the real reason you don't like reader comments, sans beautiful creamy stationery, is that they can actually tell you how they really feel about your written word. I wish your hair would have burst into flames - now that would have been news worthy.
  67. m c from Canada writes: If "journalism" is the blinkered, biased, egocentric ranting that I've come to expect from Ms Blatchford, then I say RIP. At least with blogs that produce similar stuff, they're not getting paid for it and don't have a nationally-distributed soapbox to use to proclaim it.

    And I would say the same to Ms Blatchford in person, if I could bring myself to speak to her should I happen to meet her.
  68. Larry Smith from Canada writes: Joyce from Calgary- well said. Batchford always reeks of insecurity, poor thought processes, and a healthy dose of Toronto-centric insecurity. The best words she ever wrote was "I resign" at The National Post.
  69. Gael MacLean from Vancouver, Canada writes: If Marshall McLuhan was right and the "medium is the message" then what does that say about blogging? I agree, I see the erosion of print journalism very similar to the ongoing race to the bottom of television programming. I am no more interested in reading someone's banal thoughts and opinions then I am about watching their banal lives. Perhaps Andy Wharhol was right and in this ego-centric western culture we all want our "fifteen minutes of fame." Although with inflation we are down to about 15 seconds. I've just had mine.
  70. Xiao Ping Deng from Canada writes: M Harrison from Toronto, Canada writes: Christie, if it weren't for bloggers, we'd still be in the dark about many things the mainstream media refuses to report on, like for instance the concentration camps for "undesirables" they've set up in China during the Olympics.

    Yes you are upset that there are people willing to report the truth rather than toe the company line that you so-called "real" reporters have to.

    The genie's out of the bottle now, you can't put it back in. The days of the mainstream controlled media are numbered.
    __________

    Please explain then Obama's popularity with the media, or the fact that people think Britney Spears is pretty. The media's just as good today at making silk purses out of sow's ears and manipulating your opinions as ever, if not better. Bloggers are just like you and me: starving for 15 seconds of attention and most times not getting through.
  71. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: Fantastic column Christie. You are absolutely correct. Not eveyone can write. And those who can't, shouldn't. But nowadays, everyone does. Your column was a firm but gentle reminder that writing is, indeed, a craft. The noble pursuit of "citizen journalism" is seldom noble and rarely worth pursuing.
  72. The Prytanis from Canada writes: "You see? Everyone's a writer now. Everyone's an editor. It's as if the College of Physicians and Surgeons not only encouraged patients to read all the medical websites, but also to do their own diagnoses."

    Last time I checked, Christie, you're no neurosurgeon.

    In fact, I don't remember the last time I saw a journalist string together enough coherent thoughts to approach anything resembling doctorate level insights into ... anything.

    Even if Christie's thesis that the Blog has killed journalism is dead, the locus of the event sure as $|-| | 7 wasn't her and her buddy... they're not nearly grandiose enough for that distinction.
  73. free thinker (you get what you pay for) from not far from here, Canada writes: The 'end of journalism' came because pathetic journalism like Blatchford's has become the norm. Journalists are supposed to 'speak truth to power', to question, challenge, research issues... Now it's maybe 5% of them that do that. Most Canadian journalists are caught up in this Western civilization fantasy of us against them and that clouds their judgment on almost everything they can be bothered to write. They just toe the line. Us good, Them bad. When's the last piece of honest, challenging reporting on Iraq, Palestine, neo-liberalism/conservatism, the growth of private security firms (i.e. the privatization of war), etc. etc. Blogging in this case is the emergence of a new kind of journalism, one that isn't trapped in the big paper corporate BS. Check out democracy now for real journalism. That's a good place to start. Or how about Britain, which still has two very decent newspapers - The Independent, and The Guardian. No Blatchford, it's not the end of journalism, it's a new start and it's a lot better than what you have to offer.
  74. E M from London, UK, Canada writes: Great post Ms. Blatchford. I work in PR for a large corporation, and certainly the blogosphere and changes in journalism have affected my job and how we communicate with the media - traditional and new. There now seems to be a race to be first, which sometimes supercedes the need for accuracy. There is no way to keep up with the amount of rumour-busting and corrections that we have to now handle. There is an entirely different code of conduct. On the other hand, the blogosphere brings exciting changes that were perhaps overdue. The mainstream media is no longer the gatekeeper of what it deems to be news. Now the general public decides, by the amount of articles that get picked up, digged, or linked, resulting in a greater democratization in the media. Consumers now also have a greater voice by being able to "join the convesation" Gone are the days when the editor is able to hand-choose the letters that come in. Anyone can post a response - popular or contrary. That said, I do long to see the days when there is a forum etiquette to reduce the schoolyard squabbling. Most of all, blogging is immediate. Social media allows us to have instant updates to the biggest news stories - without geo-blocking, time zones, or gatekeepers standing in the way. Living in the UK, the propane fire in Toronto last week happened at 8am my time, just as I was sitting down with a coffee and checking the online news. Everything I found out about that fire, and if there were any casualties, wasn't from the Globe & Mail or CBC.ca, it was from Twitter and You Tube. Real time. It's an exciting time. And full disclosure: I used to have a blog, but stopped because I was boring myself.
  75. Leonard Olien from Canada writes: Joyce said: "Not everyone can write. The world as a whole, has a literacy rate of approximately 78%. That means that 12% of the world can't read or write."

    I guess not everyone can do math either.

    After the wee chuckle at Joyce's expense, I think Christie's concern is not that millions of people are writing, but that professionals are spending their time producing less than professional product. I couldn't agree more.
  76. David Russell from Toronto, Canada writes: The first very short comment nailed it. "Blog" has no static definition. It has grown from a personal online diary to encapsulate spontaneous news stories from journalists poised at wi-fi hotspots close to some news worthy event. The only thing tying together "blogs" as such is that they are uploaded instantaneously onto a website. Christie pretends to be all bent out of shape over semantics and uses this to cleverly mask an article about her belief in her writing skill over other journalists.

    Content itself does not define a "blog" in fact if shakespeare himself were alive today we could have a blog spurning out beautiful dramas and poetry. Christie would probably find something negative to say about it.
  77. Kevin Peterson from Canada writes: If blogs will save us from journalism as bad as this column, please bring them on. We need less Christie.
  78. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: Reading the fools who are attacking Christie on this column shows that she hit just the right note. Free Thinker, you mean their aren't enough published attacks on neo-liberalism and neoconservativism? Sure there aren't. You probably believe there aren't enough published "alternative" theories about the 9/11 attacks either. And the CIA killed JFK.
  79. Blaque Jacque Shallaque from Canada writes: Blatch. I am a huge fan, from the Sun days and beyond.

    If it was only you and Rosie Dimanno and a few others that were writing columns and providing their take on the news, then I suspect that I would still be reading newspapers and watching the TV news.

    But so many of today's so called journalists are biased political agenda driven politically correct poodles of the establishment or of the government that I no longer necessarily believe anything I read in the paper. It certainly was not so 30 years ago. The blogosphere has made it possible to check everything the "journalists" say and write, and so often it has shown the failures of the mainstream media, that the latter has no more credibility.

    Although there are other factors, journalists have contributed to their own demise. They used to be trusted. They used to be objective. Now they are just mouthpieces for this agenda or that, chasing the quick headline or soundbit, no matter how out of context or misleading it may be.

    No one respects or trusts most journalists any more. It's sad, but that's where we are.
  80. M Harrison from Toronto, Canada writes: Xiao Ping Deng from Canada writes:
    Please explain then Obama's popularity with the media, or the fact that people think Britney Spears is pretty. The media's just as good today at making silk purses out of sow's ears and manipulating your opinions as ever, if not better. Bloggers are just like you and me: starving for 15 seconds of attention and most times not getting through.
    --------------------------

    More and more people are taking the red pill and waking up from the controlled mainstream media matrix reality they have created in league with the government. Sites like infowars.com and whatreallyhappened.com , radio shows like Jack Blood and Alex Jones, bloggers like Kurt Nimmo are waking people up. Yes the MSM keeps blathering on but more people are learning to ignore it. I'm teaching my kids to not trust the corporate media, if more people did that we could change the world.
  81. Bill Kennedy from Toronto, Canada writes: Hi Christie, This isn't the first time you have let your opinion about bloggers loose. I think it's time you interviewed some serious bloggers and learned about the blogosphere. Take a subject you're interested in and search for blogs. Follow them for a while. You might find what I did: blogging is not just "journalism without an editor". It is really about narrowcasting and interaction. My blog at EnergizedAccounting[dot]blogspot[dot]com is about Accounting Technology. It appeals to a small group of people, too small for the Globe and Mail, but very important to my livelihood. Believe me, I have tried to get articles published in mainstream media and the advice I got was "start a blog". A year ago I took that advice and now (interestingly enough) I am starting to get published. That's narrowcasting. Bloggers live for the responses they get. Often the "conversation" that goes on in the comments is as interesting as the blog itself. It allows you to connect with others with similar interests. For example, a marketing blog called Drew's Marketing Minute used an outdoor campaign as an example. The campaign happened in the early 90's, yet one blog reader actually knew the creative director of the campaign, who sent Drew the backstory, which Drew then published. What a cool connection to make! As a columnist with The Globe and Mail, Christie, you have access to that kind of feedback from your readers. Why would you deny me access to my community? You tend to paint all bloggers with the same brush, which is just as unfair as my lumping you in with the Enquirer's brand of journalism. Could we elevate the tone of this debate a little? Please go out and interview some bloggers and see if that doesn't just change your mind a little. Bill
  82. Melissa T from Italy writes: "David Russell from Toronto, Canada writes: ...Christie pretends to be all bent out of shape over semantics and uses this to cleverly mask an article about her belief in her writing skill over other journalists."

    Good observation. A lot of us missed that point (including me).

    ...

    People forget that the most powerful thing about participating in social media is our personal choice to take it or leave it. Sure, there are millions and millions of blogs, and most of them are poorly written, poorly designed, totally not user friendly and generally incoherent. Guess what? Those aren't the kind of blogs that get "Digged" or "Delicioused". They're not in the picture. I have a personal blog that's read by about 2 or 3 people, and that's cool, because that's how many people in the blog world care about some anonymous woman's semi-disclosed life.

    The point is I'm not out there pretending to be a writer or journalist; I just love writing. And that's the craft in its purest form - I don't have a motive, I'm not writing for a paycheck; I'm writing for myself.

    ...

    I also noticed the irony of people who agree with this article yet felt compelled to join the conversation. What do you think blogs are all about? Joining a conversation. It's really that simple.

    If you agreed with Blatchford's view that blogs are inane and journalists are the Hamlets of the world, spewing out soliloquies for our benefit, you sort of kill that theory by using the very device you seem to be protesting...
  83. Col T from Canada writes: Blatchford is comparing articles and features to blog posts - they're different things. Blogs are meant to be off the cuff as it happens reports or thoughts or links. Most blogs are awful but the good ones have their uses - to provide a balanced view of Canada's looming housing crash for a start as you can be sure you won't get the full story on that from the MSM until it's happened.
  84. Ryan McLaughlin from Toronto, Canada writes: Funnily enough writing about your disdain for blogging got you linked to one of the most popular ones out there - Deadspin. Great conversation here folks, keep it up.

    /dick joke
  85. michael luger from montréal, québec, Canada writes: The end is high indeed; for the hopeful, the reader