I have to quote this for your guys because this is what I have been thinking for a while:
QUOTE from TechCrunch:
When it comes to a certain type of highly visible breaking news, no-one can argue that social media kicks the mainstream media’s ass. At any given disaster, there’s possibly a 0.01% chance that a professional journalist or photographer will already be on the scene, compared to 100% odds that there’ll be some dude with a camera-phone there. And as for asking tough questions: yep, bloggers are pretty good at that too – hardly a syllable can slip from the mouth of a politician or public official without it being torn apart by an army of ‘fact-checking’ bloggers, hungry for content.
And yet, I argued back, after camera phone dude helps us establish that the plane has crashed, who can we trust to tell us why it happened? While bloggers can own the first five minutes of any breaking story – a plane crash, a fire, a burglary – it’s always going to be the professional reporters who own the next five days, or five weeks. They walk the streets, work their contacts and – yes – trawl the blogosphere for eye-witness reports, and then take all of that information, analyse it, follow it up and ultimately provide an account of events that readers can trust.
Or at least this is what they used to do. If that were still how journalism works then the unpaid bloggers wouldn’t have a hope of competing. But unfortunately, thanks to a succession of journalistic fakes and the constant tabloidisation of the press, that trust is gone. Why should someone – either an advertiser or a reader – be prepared to pay for a newspaper when they can get the same old lies and fluff from the blogosphere?
I am currently trying to find the pros and cons of the Health Care Debate/Reform that is currently taking attention of Congress and I am seeing what I already thought I saw but can now put to words: That most media outlets HAVE NOT done any research or indebth reporting on the pros and cons of the current health care issues (except for Fox News and you already know what they think of it).
So why are they not doing this? Why is it when they have a hard hitting story, they dont give the indepth reporting online?