A debate worth having
By Andrew Grant-Adamson • Jun 15th, 2007 • Category: Blogging, JournalismWhile media converges and faces a future of which we know little, it would be surprising if all those who teach journalism agreed. So criticism by Jeff Jarvis (City University of New York) of Pete Hamill (New York University) is notable only for the entrenched position it suggests.
Hamill talking on New York public radio (quoted by Jarvis) said:
You know blogging, the blogosphere. When I teach at NYU I try to tell these young potential journalists: don’t waste your time with blogs because you need to be somewhere where there are editors, where you are getting paid. A blog might be useful therapy, but it’s not, at this stage of its development, journalism. I think that is a big mistake to be doing that kind of stuff.
Jarvis, naturally on his Buzzmachine blog, responds by telling students: ": I wouldn’t waste your time with this advice about blogs."
I too disagree with Hamill (I would, having decided to blog) but his points on editing and making money are worthy of discussion. Additionally, I would like to know his position on journalists who blog as part of their jobs. There is something to talk about here.
Responding the the interviewer, Hamill also said:
I agree with you. I think one reason for it is the overdependence on the internet: to sit in a building and call up all the statements from politician x y or z or think tank a b or c is not the same as going to 116th street and seeing the change over from Puerto Rican culture to Mexican culture.
Jarvis, who revels in being provocative, responds, in a post headed "Pay no attention": "So the internet and blogs are bad for journalism. Or is that just bad for columnists? Or Hamill? Or journalism students?"
Given that Hamill’s comments on blogging and journalism were small points in a long interview promoting his new novel about immigrants in New York, there is good sense in his suggestion that reporters are not getting out into the streets enough. It would be interesting to explore these ideas with him.
While I see great benefits from the internet for journalistic research, I do see students hiding behind it rather than getting out and talking to people. But near universal ownership of telephones had a similar effect long before the internet. There is a good debate to be had here…
Andrew Grant-Adamson is Andrew Grant-Adamson is a journalist who now teaches a new generation of writers, subs and editors at the University of Westminster.
Email this author | All posts by Andrew Grant-Adamson
As the 2006/07 academic year draws to an end, the journalism students at UCE Birmingham have to show off their work at a final year exhibition of all media students’ work. How do you ‘exhibit’ jour… A debate worth having While media converges and faces a future of which we know little, it would be surprising if all those who teach journalism agreed. So criticism by Jeff Jarvis (City University of New York) of Pete …
> While I see great benefits from the internet for journalistic research, I do see students hiding behind it rather than getting out and talking to people. But near universal ownership of telephones had a similar effect long before the internet. There is a good debate to be had here
Yes, agree - as you point out, it’s an old one. technology has always been a way of preventing people from actually talking to one another face-to-face.
Digital journalism is an excellent idea, but these new forms of news distribution -a nd reaching the market - will only work if people are supplying the core facts and experiences which go to make up the news.
I think the idea that blogging keeps someone, in this case journalism students, from getting out there, talking to people, rests on a rather narrow perspective on what a blog is. A blog is just a publishing platform, and why shouldn’t journalism students, as others, use it to live blog conferences, festivals, events, or chronicle travel experiences, conversations, debates – there’s no reason why a blog should be synonymous with opining, navel-gazing or scouring over newspapers for inspiration to do just that.
I know the temptation of avoiding people and using the Internet as a sole resource for an article. But I’ve also found that once I get past the initial fear of pinning people down, the information and attitudes that can be found are worth the effort.
The Internet is great for finding facts, public records, etc. But it doesn’t get you the elusive “kicker.”