MSMerisms
We hate use of the term MSM, or for those not familiar with blogger speak, the "main-stream media." It's not that the acronym or the definition itself annoys us -- it is accurate -- but the use of MSM as of late suggests that there is some concrete line in the sand between journalism and blogging that will always be firmly in place. The use of MSM suggests that in the evolving media, there will be haves and the have-nots and no middle ground to share.
Over the past week, the intersection of the blogging-based news dynamic and that of the main-stream media got prominent placement in the daily news cycle. Jessica Cutler, like Helen, may have been the woman who launched a thousand blogger-laden ships last year (with the help of Wonkette, of course), but the recent sustained skirmishes over Jeff Gannon and Eason Jordan have continued the undeclared war between blogs and the main-stream media. Is there going to be a giant wooden horse with hidden menacing bloggers ready to pounce, storm Troy and doom the MSM?
We think not, but for the time being, the conflicts are palpable, both to media observers and those who fall victim to pesky bloggers directly or indirectly. So what's next?
Jurek Martin (at right), who pens the Financial Times's Letter to America, wrote over the weekend of the "Attack of the killer bloggers."
So people are seeing a different universe in action and I am not sure it is an improvement on what went before. ... Certainly there are bodies all over the place, lynched by the operators of web logs, unfiltered and unaccountable competition to what they call the MSM (mainstream media).
Martin contends that blogs are hurting traditional journalism, because of a lack of standards, or as he puts it, "gatekeepers online." He suggests that a good old-fashioned newspaper is always a good source of information. We whole-heartedly agree. Newspapers are lovely things. We read them every day in print and online.
But times are a changing. And we think 1115.org hits the nail on the head in its recent reposting of an August analysis it wrote about the main-stream media's coverage of blogs and a roundup of an interesting, if not frustrating, blog discussion on CNN's "Inside Politics with Judy Woodruff."
Says 1115.org:
With two major blog-initiated stories causing commotion simultaneously, the 24-hour cable networks decide to cover the story. Typically for news organizations primarily concerned with ratings and wishing to shift the focus away from stories they were beaten to, the main issue was blogs, not Gannon/Guckert or Jordan.
Later on CNN, AmericaBlog's John Aravosis 
(at left) chatted with Carol Lin about why the "MSM" was beaten by the blogs, particularly his, on Gannon/Guckert-gate. Lin seemed a bit memorized (as if the world has just discovered e-mail as a new communications medium) as she questioned Aravosis about why such a huge news-gathering operation, like CNN, was outmaneuvered on the Gannon/Guckert affair. There are also partisan angles to the recent blogger buzz, with Aravosis pointing readers to a recent Oregonian editorial.
But are the days of print journalism numbered? If you read the Post's report on the future of print journalism, which dominated the cover of Sunday's Business section, you may wonder. Just look at Frank Ahren's lede: "The venerable newspaper is in trouble."
Rare is the paper these days that is not embracing the Web. In addition to their own sites, papers such as the New York Times, the Miami Herald and the Houston Chronicle e-mail free headlines and news summaries to people who don't have time for the newspaper but carry BlackBerrys and other electronic gizmos.
As the Post notes, its parent company, The Washington Post Co., bought Slate, the online-only magazine and has launched a blogging section featuring Post writers Joel Achenbach and the Going Out Gurus. Achenblog is still finding its tempo and style ... and is having trouble grasping the concept of linking.
(Anyhow, the Post isn't in any dire financial straits. It makes a mint and then some on all those Kaplan test prep classes you perhaps flirted with back when you were freaking out about LSATs, or on the flip-side, mocked repeatedly. So rest assured, you'll still be getting your Sunday Source, but who knows, it may eventually be paid for by bright-eyed and ambitious grad school-bound undergraduates in Ann Arbor, Cambridge, Palo Alto, Charlottesville, et al ...)
Additionally, as Fishbowl DC pointed out last week, the Post's Steven Pearlstein writes that what's happening right now, though we may not realize it, is a massive retooling of traditional news delivery:
What we're witnessing is nothing less than a wholesale restructuring of the news business -- one that has been evolving slowly for a number of years but is now proceeding at mach speed.
We think that sounds right. Old and new media are in a transitional phase. So in the midst of new free tabloids and blogs, including our own beloved DCist, how do you see the media dynamic shifting? Do print stalwarts need to embrace the lovable but sometimes prickly blogosphere? Or will there be a fixed division between the world of blogs and the world of journalism?