Media Monday – February 23, 2009

Can You Believe What You Read? – Part II

Last week we gave some of the more egregious recent examples of bad reporting and outright false reporting in some of our newspapers.  This week we’ll discuss my own back yard.  Can you believe what you read in the blogosphere?

While this will offend our friends in the print media to no end, the blogosphere is only different from the print media in that it has a lower cost of entry.  Therefore, there are far more blogs.  Like the print media, there are well written blogs that base their news AND opinion on fact and there are blogs that offer no evidence, no argument and publish the most scurrilous lies.  There are many more that fall in-between.  Admittedly, some blogs far exceed anything in the print media when it comes to the level of vitriol and their bombastic nature.  However that, again, is primarily due to the low cost of entry (free – minimal cost) for setting up a blog.

Another thing that needs to be remembered when comparing blogs to print media is that an overwhelming number of blogs provide opinion and personal experience versus straight news.  Also, for the purposes of this piece we will be only examining blogs which claim to report political news or offer political opinion.

IF you are only interested in reading “news” and opinion which affirms your own world view, STOP right here.  You aren’t even interested in being a critically thinking consumer of media (but at least you’ll admit it).  If, however, you are interested in more than one point of view (if for no other reason than to know what the other guy is saying), read on.  There may be something here for you.

We’re going to start with the three blogs I contribute to:  Salisbury News, Red Maryland, and my own Delmarva Dealings.

Red Maryland (as a rule) is well thought out, provides a variety of viewpoints from the center right, and is generally well written.  Those of use who write for Red Maryland don’t always agree with one another and say so.  However, I do enjoy reading well argued positions, even if I don’t agree with them.  It’s a great example of what a political blog should be.

Obviously it’s hard to be objective about Delmarva Dealings.  I do most of the writing.  It’s a little hard to disagree with yourself, unless you’re a schizophrenic.  However, I pride myself on (at least attempting) well thought out positions based on factual evidence.  Sure, I’m bombastic at times.  I won’t even argue with a few readers that call me arrogant.  However, I continue to stand on the fact that we always have evidence to back up our claims and that we are quick to correct on the rare occasions when we have been shown to be in error.  Remember, most of what we do at Delmarva Dealings is op-ed.  Unfortunately, some readers have a hard time distinguishing between news and opinion.  Of course, if you were brought up on a newspaper like the Daily Times, I can’t fault you.

I’m sure all the Joeys and anti-Joeys out there aren’t going to be happy with me.  We tackle Salisbury News.  For all of you Joeys out there, you should be happy to know that I can’t find any evidence that what Joe reports as news is false.  If all of you anti-Joeys out there want to disagree, please send me some evidence.

SbyNEWS has, in many ways, offered a genuine community service.  From Salisbury’s wastewater treatment plant to the current brouha over the Somerset County Sheriff, it often scoops our local paper.  It delivers news faster.  And, as I noted above, it appears to be pretty accurate (in its news reporting).

I know, the anti-Joeys just think that I’m an Albero shill.  You would be wrong.  I’m a friend of Joe Albero.  I’m the kind of friend who doesn’t hesitate to criticize him when I find it necessary.  Don’t believe me?  Ask Albero how he enjoys those Saturday afternoon phone calls.  No, I rarely criticize him in print (but I have).  Again, he’s a friend.  Also, I’ve seen immense improvement over the last few years.

Does SbyNEWS fall short?  Yes.  It particularly falls short in its mixing of news and opinion.  Albero posts so often that I sympathize.  However, since SbyNEWS has become an actual alternative to the Daily Times, his responsibility has increased.  I have suggested that he slow down a little.  However, his readers genuinely like his version of “red meat news”.

Is SbyNEWS without other faults?  Of course not.  However, while Joe Albero can be legitimately criticized, much of the criticism leveled at him has no basis in fact.  Some of the more outrageous examples cited as evidence of the “evil Albero” are not actually written by him.  Many are in the form of comments (which we will discuss later in this post).  Albero is often critcized for leveling personal attacks on certain officials.  While it is true that he has printed some items that I wouldn’t, most of these “personal attacks” (that I know of) are factual.  I personally believe that his piece of mayoral candidate Gary Comegys’ non-compliance with a child support order was out of bounds (only because his ex-wife and child are not legitimate political targets).  However, any criticism of Albero’s post on candidate (then non-candidate) Bryan Brushmiller’s record is ridiculous.  The man was running for office.  Don’t voters have a right to know if he has legal problems?

A lot of the criticism leveled at Joe Albero and SbyNEWS simply proves that market forces are undeniable.  Certain people don’t like him.  He can be arrogant (which really seems to be the nexus of most criticism).  He’s definitely an acquired taste.  He would also give you the shirt off his back.  BUT …

SbyNEWS has a large and loyal readership.  If it wasn’t for that following you could easily argue that Albero was just some crank.  Additionally, the very fact that his approach to blogging has improved greatly since his start is something that his friends and opponents should give him credit for.

Well G. A., what about other blogs?

There are hundreds, thousands (probably millions) of great blogs out there.  Locally, we have people that I usually agree with such as Monoblogue, Brian Griffiths and Worcester Right (none of whom like Albero BTW) to bloggers I usually disagree with like Two Sentz.  Nationally, the numbers are far too big to even attempt a decent list.  However, I should mention Bearing Drift (one of my favorite Virginia blogs) and QandO.

If you are genuinely interested in reading some great (an
d some not so great) material, a great place to start is with BlogNetNews.  BNN has feeds for blogs in every state, multiple metropolitan areas or regions, conservative blogs, lefty blogs, and even blogs specific to certain industries.  See what others are saying and judge for yourself.  If you are interested in just the Delmarva area, try the BNN-Delmarva feed (of which I am the editor).

Most of what you come across are blogs written by people who are putting forward their point of view.  You should hold them all to the same standard.  Are they well written?  Do they make a logical argument?  Do they present evidence for that argument?  If not, you should think twice before counting them as a reliable source (whether you agree with them or not).

Are there blogs that just shouldn’t even be considered as a valid source of information?  Of course.  If you are making even a half-hearted attempt at being objective they are fairly self evident.  Unfortunately, we have quite a few locally.

These blogs are typically anonymous or use fictitious names for all of their writers.  These blogs often serve as mere rant sites by a few twisted individuals.  Fortunately, very few people read them.

To be fair, I’m going to use two local sites with opposing points of view as examples:

The first is called The Anti-Anti-Albero Blog*.  It’s title is pretty self-explanatory.  This guy (or gal?) put up a blog to go after the people that attack Joe Albero (it’s actually creepy to find out that there are quite a few “anti-Abero blogs” – get a life guys).  The problem is that this person not only attacks the person(s) attacking their hero Joe Albero, they went after family.  It was pretty nasty.  However, to this person’s credit the site appears to have been dismantled except for one post explaining that they now know that two wrongs don’t make a right.  For this they deserve a pat on the back.  They should also go to confession for some of the stuff that they had posted up to today.

The second is titled Views of a Salisbury Grinch*.  This little masterpiece is written (anonymously) by Salisbury resident Jonathan Taylor.  This is already a long post and it would take hours to attempt explaining the motives of Mr. Taylor.  Suffice to say that this guy used to be one of Salisbury Councilwoman Debbie Campbell’s greatest fans.  Somehow his feelings were hurt and he has made it his life’s mission to attack Mrs. Campbell and those of us who have been her friend.

Personally, I could care less.  If someone has nothing better to do with their time than to make bizarre and obscene Photoshop images of Debbie Campbell and Joe Albero it’s their right.  If that person attacks Joe Albero’s wife and attempts to get her fired from her job I guess there is nothing that we can do to stop him.  However, when this person makes claims that are nothing short of lies I think they should be refuted.  These lies have even included the accusation of marital infidelity.  We have even seen veiled discussion of an individuals’ sexual orientation.  When certain local politicians claim adherence to civility, yet use this same site as their unofficial campaign blog they too should be called out.  When caught, claiming humor doesn’t cut it.  The only thing Mr. Taylor shares with Jonathan Swift is a first name.

What’s next – claims that a mayoral candidate molests livestock or a council candidate is a pedophile?  Given that these individuals never offer proof for their non-existent arguments they have ceded all credibility with all but the most biased or poorly educated reader.

What about comments?

Comments are really where things go haywire on the blogosphere.  I am constantly amazed at the lengths people will go to spew bile.  However, this raises another question:  To what extent do we want to censor our readers?

At Delmarva Dealings we have a simply written comment policy.  I heartily recommend one for all blogs.  However, nothing beats the policy set forth by streiff, the publisher of Red Maryland – Comments are at his sole discretion.  Be boring at your own risk.

When someone comments on something that I write and I disagree or find it offensive I take the time to refute it.  In an ideal world, blogs like SbyNEWS would do the same.  However, when you have a large comment volume that’s just not practical.  It is easy on blogs such as “the Grinch” where the author seems to attempt a conversation with himself.

Therefore, much to the delight of my critics, I can’t claim an answer for this particular problem … other than a little self restraint on the part of all of us.

What’s the BOTTOM LINE?

It’s simple.  Be a critical consumer of news and opinion.  Hold the authors accountable.  DEMAND that they put forth credible, logical arguments.  Yes, that includes even me.  Despite the opinion of some, even I don’t think I’m perfect.

* – there are some sites taht I find so sleazy that I won’t link to.  If you want to see for yourself, Google it.

Sphere: Related Content