Bloggers vs. Journalists
A question was posed to us: Is it a good thing that blogs are blossoming in Malaysia?
A little background. I read both newspapers and blogs, and I have to admit I have a great deal more respect for people like Jeff Ooi, Mack Zul and of course my lecturer Oon Yeoh (blatant ass kissing :p) than publications like the Star or NST.
I think the debate between bloggers vs. journalists does not have to be dragged out to this extent, and I think it is a waste of time to be fighting one another when you can work together to achieve something greater than what each camp is able to do individually.
Perhaps this is the idealism and naiveté kicking in again, but I believe that if someone wants to pervert the flow of information and mislead the public, they can do so regardless of whether they’re a blogger, a journalist, or an editor.
The Star ran a feature in Section 2 regarding the possibility of changing homosexuals back to heterosexuals, quoting solely from a study conducted by a Dr. Robert Spitzer which was criticised for the methodology used, ie sample bias.
Gay and lesbians subjects who took part in the subject were not your everyday gay and lesbian people. They were mostly from ex-gay ministries and organisations involved in reparation, which raises questions about the objectivity and agenda behind the publication of Spitzer’s findings.
I know this because I’ve been involved in intense gay rights debates in a Blizzforums, and have done research into the arguments and studies quoted by the anti-gay camp. How many Star readers know about this? How many would bother to look this up after reading the feature?
In this case I would argue that precisely because of the fact that journalists are more respected and are perceived to have more credibility that they are able to easily manipulate the public into thinking that what is printed in a newspaper is the gospel truth.
Who knows how many people the Star has managed to ‘convince’ that being gay is a choice when there is no definitive neutral study to prove it one way or another?
Then there is the infamous feud between blogger Jeff Ooi and the editor of NST, both of whom saw fit to use their arsenal of weapons against each other in a fight that was nothing but a personal vendetta. For the editor of a national newspaper to subject readers to the crap that was printed, for no other purpose than to settle petty personal disputes, is just ridiculous to say the least.
So again I ask, what credibility? Perhaps those are isolated incidents, but I can help but ask, if they can do this once with no repercussions whatsoever, who’s to say they won’t do it again? That statement applies to both the Star and the NST, and while these episodes really opened my eyes, the silver lining is that after those incidents I am extremely skeptical of the things that I read in our dailies.
That’s about enough exposition, now to answer the question. I think it’s a good thing that there’re blogs around who alert us to the things that are really happening. From the Memogate incident that led to CBS anchor Dan Rather’s resignation, to the discussions and opinions regarding the inter-faith forum in the blogosphere, blogs provide an avenue for information and debate.
Sure, what’s said in blogs does not carry the weight of what’s said in publications, and people may be misled by what’s said in some blogs. However, I think that people need to learn not to trust everything they read, and to refer to more than one source before making up their minds. If they need to learn it the hard way, then at the very least, at the end of the day, they will have learned.
Oon Yeoh mentioned that there are young people who only read blogs for news, and that is a bad thing. On the other side of the spectrum there are people who only read newspapers for news, and at the end of the day the issue is relying on one news source and one perspective, regardless of whether it’s newspapers, blogs, online publications etc.
Someone in Blizzforums once said to me, the mark of a good debater is one who can argue both sides of the issue. You can’t do that if you only confine yourself to one viewpoint.
A little background. I read both newspapers and blogs, and I have to admit I have a great deal more respect for people like Jeff Ooi, Mack Zul and of course my lecturer Oon Yeoh (blatant ass kissing :p) than publications like the Star or NST.
I think the debate between bloggers vs. journalists does not have to be dragged out to this extent, and I think it is a waste of time to be fighting one another when you can work together to achieve something greater than what each camp is able to do individually.
Perhaps this is the idealism and naiveté kicking in again, but I believe that if someone wants to pervert the flow of information and mislead the public, they can do so regardless of whether they’re a blogger, a journalist, or an editor.
The Star ran a feature in Section 2 regarding the possibility of changing homosexuals back to heterosexuals, quoting solely from a study conducted by a Dr. Robert Spitzer which was criticised for the methodology used, ie sample bias.
Gay and lesbians subjects who took part in the subject were not your everyday gay and lesbian people. They were mostly from ex-gay ministries and organisations involved in reparation, which raises questions about the objectivity and agenda behind the publication of Spitzer’s findings.
I know this because I’ve been involved in intense gay rights debates in a Blizzforums, and have done research into the arguments and studies quoted by the anti-gay camp. How many Star readers know about this? How many would bother to look this up after reading the feature?
In this case I would argue that precisely because of the fact that journalists are more respected and are perceived to have more credibility that they are able to easily manipulate the public into thinking that what is printed in a newspaper is the gospel truth.
Who knows how many people the Star has managed to ‘convince’ that being gay is a choice when there is no definitive neutral study to prove it one way or another?
Then there is the infamous feud between blogger Jeff Ooi and the editor of NST, both of whom saw fit to use their arsenal of weapons against each other in a fight that was nothing but a personal vendetta. For the editor of a national newspaper to subject readers to the crap that was printed, for no other purpose than to settle petty personal disputes, is just ridiculous to say the least.
So again I ask, what credibility? Perhaps those are isolated incidents, but I can help but ask, if they can do this once with no repercussions whatsoever, who’s to say they won’t do it again? That statement applies to both the Star and the NST, and while these episodes really opened my eyes, the silver lining is that after those incidents I am extremely skeptical of the things that I read in our dailies.
That’s about enough exposition, now to answer the question. I think it’s a good thing that there’re blogs around who alert us to the things that are really happening. From the Memogate incident that led to CBS anchor Dan Rather’s resignation, to the discussions and opinions regarding the inter-faith forum in the blogosphere, blogs provide an avenue for information and debate.
Sure, what’s said in blogs does not carry the weight of what’s said in publications, and people may be misled by what’s said in some blogs. However, I think that people need to learn not to trust everything they read, and to refer to more than one source before making up their minds. If they need to learn it the hard way, then at the very least, at the end of the day, they will have learned.
Oon Yeoh mentioned that there are young people who only read blogs for news, and that is a bad thing. On the other side of the spectrum there are people who only read newspapers for news, and at the end of the day the issue is relying on one news source and one perspective, regardless of whether it’s newspapers, blogs, online publications etc.
Someone in Blizzforums once said to me, the mark of a good debater is one who can argue both sides of the issue. You can’t do that if you only confine yourself to one viewpoint.
posted by Saffron at 3:03 AM
0 comments
