The Difference Between a Network Reporter and a Blogger

[Kathianne]

I can see the rolleyes and hear the moans. Seriously folks, you've got to move into the 21st C, 12 years in.

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/07/20/the-difference-between-a-network-reporter-and-a-blogger/


The Difference Between a Network Reporter and a Blogger We’re often scolded that as bloggers, we’re not real journalists.


This morning the nation awoke to an act of madness. My cell phone screen was covered in updates as I got out of bed half an hour in advance of a planned interview on America’s Morning News. I’m sure most bloggers’ and reporters’ cell phones were the same.


I hit Google to find out what I could. I hit Twitter to see reactions and pick up details. That’s how I picked up Piers Morgan’s disgraceful tweets (http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/07/20/cnns-piers-morgan-first-to-use-colorado-tragedy-to-assault-second-amendment-rights/). As I prepped for the radio interview, news broke that the gunman’s name was James Holmes. I went on the air, talked about the story but didn’t speculate on the gunman’s motives since nothing was known about him yet. AMN’s hosts handled the story with perfect restraint.


After the interview I hit Google again. I hit Facebook hard to scour for a James or Jim Holmes in Aurora, Colorado. I watched Twitter to see if anyone else had anything confirmed.


I’m sure ABC News’ Brian Ross was searching Google and Facebook and Twitter at about the same time I was. So were thousands of other bloggers and reporters.


But I couldn’t come up with anything tying any of the James Holmes’s I found to the massacre in Colorado. I didn’t post any of what I found. Neither did most other people who were doing similar searches.


ABC News’ Brian Ross, on the other hand, reported on the air that his “investigation” had led him to a Jim Holmes who had connections to a Tea Party group. That turned out to be completely and totally false. Ross leaped to a predetermined storyline — Tea Party = violence — smeared an innocent man and changed that man’s life forever. Did Brian Ross ever stop to think that he could be sparking more violence?


At least if we’re confronted with physical danger, most of us now live in states where it is legal to carry firearms to defend ourselves or we can find some other way to defend ourselves and our loved ones. But how can we defend ourselves from the irresponsible, opportunistic mainstream media smear? We’re all at the mercy of “reporters,” scare quotes intended, like Brian Ross now.

[Anton Chigurh]

ABC News’ Brian Ross, on the other hand, reported on the air that his “investigation” had led him to a Jim Holmes who had connections to a Tea Party group. That turned out to be completely and totally false. Ross leaped to a predetermined storyline — Tea Party = violence — smeared an innocent man and changed that man’s life forever.This is indicative of entrenched political bias and zeal at all levels of ABC News - knowing that something like this has to get the approval of the producer before airing. There were many hands in this, and many Yes Men for this. Not a one of them worried all that much about veracity. Getting that "Tea Party" name out as early as possible in this, on national television, was all that really mattered to these zealots.

They are not journalists, they are political hacks and Obama cheerleaders.

[Shadow]

Is this kind of thing really that much different than the SWATTING stories? That was the goal...right...to smear...regardless of 'truth'. Doesn't really matter that they might hurt an innocent man (no consideration for that fact). Wonder what would happen if someone they targeted ever ended up dead? Would they take responsibility? I wondered this the last time the media (and Obama) got the public riled up after a mass shooting. Trying to sick folks on the Palin's for political point scoring.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Is this kind of thing really that much different than the SWATTING stories? That was the goal...right...to smear...regardless of 'truth'. Doesn't really matter that they might hurt an innocent man (no consideration for that fact). Wonder what would happen if someone they targeted ever ended up dead? Would they take responsibility? I wondered this the last time the media (and Obama) got the public riled up after a mass shooting. Trying to sick folks on the Palin's for political point scoring.

What? People like that worry about their bad actions!? They are liberals, the worrying and taking responsibility is for the opposition, not for highly enlightened souls such as they are! They have a built in PASS the size Texas! Example, the edited phone call that made Zimmerman look to be a racist by editting out the question from the dispatcher, etc. Mainstream meda is a third arm of the damn Dem party! That means that it is corrupt as hell!-Tyr

[Anton Chigurh]

He should sue their asses off.

[Kathianne]

Is this kind of thing really that much different than the SWATTING stories? That was the goal...right...to smear...regardless of 'truth'. Doesn't really matter that they might hurt an innocent man (no consideration for that fact). Wonder what would happen if someone they targeted ever ended up dead? Would they take responsibility? I wondered this the last time the media (and Obama) got the public riled up after a mass shooting. Trying to sick folks on the Palin's for political point scoring.

I see your point in that the victim has reported getting threats. I don't think Ross though was trying to harm the man, just taking his preconceived, hopeful, wishes to the point where he could hopefully make them come 'true.' He's a liberal tool.

Swatting on the other hand, I think could be a hoped for, "Murder by Swat Team" given fake calls. The desire to cause harm is the intent.

[Thunderknuckles]

Great post Kat. It goes to show you just how dead real investigative journalism is. Take that blogger for example. Although I agree with him, his entire research methodology revolves around Google, Twitter, and Facebook?
A good number of members of this forum could fill that guy's shoes while still maintaining their day jobs.
As for Brian Ross, the guy has zero credibility. I actually feel sorry for the guy. His entire life's work revolves around manufacturing news.

[Shadow]

What? People like that worry about their bad actions!? They are liberals, the worrying and taking responsibility is for the opposition, not for highly enlightened souls such as they are! They have a built in PASS the size Texas! Example, the edited phone call that made Zimmerman look to be a racist by editting out the question from the dispatcher, etc. Mainstream meda is a third arm of the damn Dem party! That means that it is corrupt as hell!-Tyr

Right...they are taught to act this way...'rules for radicals' and all that rot.



I see your point in that the victim has reported getting threats. I don't think Ross though was trying to harm the man, just taking his preconceived, hopeful, wishes to the point where he could hopefully make them come 'true.' He's a liberal tool.

Swatting on the other hand, I think could be a hoped for, "Murder by Swat Team" given fake calls. The desire to cause harm is the intent.

Yes... but unless I misunderstood... they knew they had the wrong man before printing the story...right? To me it's the same thing...maybe not intent to harm physically. But they had no regard for other consequences either.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I see your point in that the victim has reported getting threats. I don't think Ross though was trying to harm the man, just taking his preconceived, hopeful, wishes to the point where he could hopefully make them come 'true.' He's a liberal tool.

Swatting on the other hand, I think could be a hoped for, "Murder by Swat Team" given fake calls. The desire to cause harm is the intent.

However as a liberal tool he can and will cause harm by pushing his insane liberal agenda forward. Its just that he will do so combined with other liberal idiots that often push political causes that greatly harm this nation! Agreed the Murder by Swat is a deliberate and hoped for death of the victim. As such when caught the person responsible should receive at least a minumium of 30 to 40 years in prison with no possibiliy of an early parole. If the victim of the crime died as a result the person responsible for the false call they should automaticly get the death sentence IMHO. Serious punishment for a very serious cime is surely and justly called for ..-Tyr

[Shadow]

Great post Kat. It goes to show you just how dead real investigative journalism is. Take that blogger for example. Although I agree with him, his entire research methodology revolves around Google, Twitter, and Facebook?
A good number of members of this forum could fill that guy's shoes while still maintaining their day jobs.
As for Brian Ross, the guy has zero credibility. I actually feel sorry for the guy. His entire life's work revolves around manufacturing news.

No kidding...talk about lazy. Sad... when being 'first' with a story means you have to actually hit up the social network pages for information.

[aboutime]

No kidding...talk about lazy. Sad... when being 'first' with a story means you have to actually hit up the social network pages for information.

What most of us see from the MSM each day, is nothing more than a collection of wannabe, amateur journalism students who are on loan to the MSM because they are convinced, it's just so easy to intimidate, fool, and lie to the American people. Because they honestly do believe. WE ARE ALL as dumb, and easily led as they are.

Those wannabe journalism students who get their Minimum wage jobs that make them feel famous, are nothing more than OBAMA supporters looking for their 15 minutes of fame from the other easily led, gullible, uninformed Americans who WILL NEVER ADMIT, they made a mistake when they voted for Obama in 2008.
And, those same uninformed, gullible journalism students need the applause from those who voted for Obama...it's a game of seeing WHO can outsmart the other, before they find out...OBAMA, and the Journalism students are LIARS.