The Revolution Will Not Be Blogged

Hannibal (Ars Technica) writes:

It has often been noted since the rise of the Web that journalism is undergoing a forced makeover, but I'm actually just as fascinated by the ways in which things haven't changed. [..] Web publishing is still a very exclusive business, with its own gatekeepers, institutions, hierarchies, etc. For instance, out of about 5 billion people in the world, how many of them read, write, and use a computer regularly Now, how many of those people have enough tech savvy to publish on the Web And of that select group, how many have the motivation/inclination/ambition to actually publish anything online Finally, if your voice turns out to be at all popular, it's going to cost you to continue publishing--and if you're really popular, it'll cost you a lot. So what you wind up with is an "amateur" tech publishing sphere that draws from the exact same narrow demographic slice as traditional journalism: white, college educated, middle- and upper-middle-class people who've been professionally trained with a very specific skill set. Regardless of how many of these types of people you know, when you look at the Big Picture it's a very small slice of the population. So while it may be true that, as Dan Gillmor says, "the rules of journalism are changing," the faces making the new rules are the same as the ones making the old rules. "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss..."

At a recent Wall Street Journal tech conference, the Journal had instigated a gag rule for reporters to the effect that whatever some speaker said on stage was considered "off the record." This was ostensibly to get the speakers to loosen up and talk more candidly to the audience about their companies and their work. The problem with this plan was, nobody informed the bloggers of the rules, so they reported it all. This Wired article has the scoop on the incident, which goes to show just how definitions of "journalist" are shifting.

It has often been noted since the rise of the Web that journalism is undergoing a forced makeover, but I'm actually just as fascinated by the ways in which things haven't changed. It's very easy to fool yourself about the supposed "democratizing" nature of Web publishing, and I even fell prey to the myth initially before Caesar (the guy who signs the checks for our monthly server bills) set me straight. But all you have to do is think about it for a moment to realize that Web publishing is still a very exclusive business, with its own gatekeepers, institutions, hierarchies, etc. For instance, out of about 5 billion people in the world, how many of them read, write, and use a computer regularly Now, how many of those people have enough tech savvy to publish on the Web And of that select group, how many have the motivation/inclination/ambition to actually publish anything online Finally, if your voice turns out to be at all popular, it's going to cost you to continue publishing--and if you're really popular, it'll cost you a lot. So what you wind up with is an "amateur" tech publishing sphere that draws from the exact same narrow demographic slice as traditional journalism: white, college educated, middle- and upper-middle-class people (anecdotally, the male/female ratio is very good for blogging) who've been professionally trained with a very specific skill set. Regardless of how many of these types of people you know (I and most of my friends fall into this demographic), when you look at the Big Picture it's a very small slice of the population. So while it may be true that, as Dan Gillmor says, "the rules of journalism are changing," the faces making the new rules are the same as the ones making the old rules. "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss..."

So am I trying to downplay the impact of Web publishing on traditional journalism If we're talking about Web publishing giving a voice to the voiceless, then yeah, I definitely am. There are a few important counter-examples that you might drag up to contradict me (like the homeless guy who runs a blog), but I'd just remind you that the plural of "anecdote" is not "data." What's amazing about the Web as a social space is that it has succeeded in reproducing and in many ways even reinforcing traditional power relations between social groups. So I guess the take-home point is that, not only will the revolution not be televised, but it won't be blogged, either.

Of course, online journalism is having a very interesting and subtle impact on the way that news gets reported and stories develop, and through the years at Ars I've been fortunate enough not only to witness some of that but also to be a part of it. So I could write a whole other editorial about the ways in which online journalism is evolving to work within existing media structures to affect "the news," but that'll have to wait for another day.

6/5/2003 - 12:16PM