« back to homepage

Are weblogs inherantly unethical? (UPDATED)

Monday, February 28, 2005

Blogs are either the greatest boon to the voice of the people or the greatest tool to create unsubstantiated rumor, for those inclined to do so. Before you can answer of bloggers are really replacing journalists, you have to ask if the methods employed are legitimate to that end. Is that blogger operating in an ethical and non-abusive manner?

“Journalists—the people who actually report the news—are acutely aware of the potential for abuse that is inherent in their system, which relies on support from businesses and power brokers, each with an agenda to promote. Their ethical standards are designed to delineate the journalist’s responsibilities and provide a clear code of conduct that will ensure the integrity of the news.”
- Rebecca Blood

Of course this is only the first step - a discerning and interested public is required to complete the handshake. If we, the public, care to rise to the level of Journalist, perhaps we need a code of ethics ourselves.

Rebecca Blood has proposed 6 bylaws for blogging to help define what’s missing. Next time you read a blog, ask yourself this question:  Are they a reporter or a fanboy?

And consider this with the news that Sony has now decided to support Gawker Media to the tune of $25,000 US a MONTH (AdAge.com, January 31, 2005. Print subscription required to view article). Big bucks for a weblog, and peanuts to what polictical parties pay. For now.

At what point does corporate or political support color weblog journalism? Do the folks at Gawker Media,  producers of Gizmodo, Defamer and more, need to know the 6 rules? (Based on their previous fanboy opinions of Sony-based technologies like Blu-ray and the PSP, I would argue a hearty “oh yeah…”)

UPDATE:
By all measures they do and I don’t - I confused Weblogs Inc’s Engadget with Gawker’s Gizmodo, which I do strongly favor. It may be that they look too damn alike to me, or that with the advent of RSS readers, you sometimes don’t know which content come from which source, or the incredible similarities between both sites when it comes to some features. 

I don’t know who copies whom (although my money’s on Engadget copying the clearly more-creative Gawker brands) but the fact remains that they BOTH more resemble templates than anything else. Change the header, change the color, change a bullet or character graphic and you have a new website. (Another note - Gizmodo changed their look just days after they commented here. Power of the press - hoo hah!)

Still, my faux-pas before is an unwittengly-good example of why blogs need to be considered opinion pieces first and not journalism. They need to earn that right. I just thank god daily that Matt Drudge doesn’t use this site as a source…

Read Rebbecca Blood’s “6 blogging bylaws”...

Posted by Admin on 02/28 at 03:13 AM
Posted in: Idle Chatter   • Comments (3) • Permalink

  1. Gawker Media has nothing to do with Engadget, Joystiq, or TUAW. Please get your facts straight before you disparage us or accuse us of being Sony fanboys.

    Peter Rojas
    Engadget

    Posted by Peter Rojas  on  02/27  at  01:48 PM

  2. Quite true - And I’ve updated the story accordingly. I have respect for most of what I read on Gizmodo and Engadget is definately the more Sony-fanboy site of the two. 

    Still - perhaps it would help if you both just don’t look nearly identical?

    Posted by Admin  on  02/28  at  05:16 AM

  3. The piece of the puzzle you’re missing is that I created both sites.

    Posted by Peter Rojas  on  02/28  at  05:43 PM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Smileys

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Next entry »
Microsoft in violation of patents on Windows Media?

« Previous entry
Parts is Parts