I thought I would quickly advertise a recent paper called ““The truth is not in the middle”: Journalistic norms of climate change bloggers. It’s by Christel van Eck, Bob Mulder, and Art DeWulf, who are also involved in the survey of blog audiences.
The paper included interviews with a range of blog authors about what journalistic norms they typically try to satisfy. It included myself and a number of others who will be familiar to most of my readers. The interviews suggested that most bloggers regarded themselves as satisfying many of the journalistic norms, but maybe saw them somewhat differently to their traditional meanings.
Personally, I’d hadn’t given this a great deal of thought. I mostly see myself as a scientist who writes a blog, rather than as a journalist. I think I have some relevant expertise, so can – at times – be talking with some authority, but I do try to make clear when that’s the case, or when I’m simply expressing some views about something I may not fully understand. I think it’s important to be honest and, if possible, reasonable, but I don’t feel any obligation to provide some kind of balance, especially when it comes to scientific views that I regard as wrong.
Mostly I regard this blog as a space where I can express my views and where others can comment if they’re happy to satisfy the moderation and comments policies. I’m not really providing a service, and – apart from learning a lot – I don’t particularly benefit from writing this. I mostly try to write about what I’m currently interested in, but I am pleased if others also find it of interest (although this isn’t what specifically motivates my post writing).
Anyway, the paper is open access so if you would like to learn more about whether or not bloggers regard themselves as satisfying journalistic norms, you can read it.
“The truth is not in the middle”: Journalistic norms of climate change bloggers by Christel van Eck, Bob Mulder and Art Dewulf.