This is an example of how hard it is to control media perceptions.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Most Viewed
The Times has an article about the degree to which The View seeks to play a significant role in the election. Why?
And there is, emerging, a sense that The View and Chris Rock and the Comedy Central shows are actually doing a BETTER job of getting to the meat of things. What do you think about that?
An assignment about ...something ..I forget
If it's true that our energies, as consumers of news, are switching over to the internet, what does that say about our absorption of info?
Please read Is Google Making Us Stupid? And comment on your blogs.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Forgetting Sarah Palin
There was a media rebellion today -- scroll down until you find that phrase. It was covered extensively in many more places.
UPDATE: Courtney has more.
UPDATE: Courtney has more.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Kevin thinks the media started to make McCain's unworthiness a story. ABC anyone?
Joe and KC looked at media attacking media and politicians attacking media.
A couple of you thought there might be a where's Biden? meme.
We're still discussing the use of the who-owns-change? meme. Courtney really uses links well to support her arguments.
Caroline wonders when a gaffe really start to matter. Disasters, she implies, push the candidates off script.
Let's remember Brent's question during Wolfberg Week. What's the relationship between an ad and its context --specifically the response to that ad?
Harry caught Rachel M. editing selectively.
We have to talk about the hacking story, right Sarai?
I'm also interested in the concept of media exhaustion.
Race plus age = rage. Let's keep an eye on the age meme.
And the health meme.
Right?
What's the media? A personal question, to Chysey.
Can we talk about the 60 minutes interview?
I'm going to raise a false equivalency question.
Chysey about The View.
Here's : Frank Rich
Joe and KC looked at media attacking media and politicians attacking media.
A couple of you thought there might be a where's Biden? meme.
We're still discussing the use of the who-owns-change? meme. Courtney really uses links well to support her arguments.
Caroline wonders when a gaffe really start to matter. Disasters, she implies, push the candidates off script.
Let's remember Brent's question during Wolfberg Week. What's the relationship between an ad and its context --specifically the response to that ad?
Harry caught Rachel M. editing selectively.
We have to talk about the hacking story, right Sarai?
I'm also interested in the concept of media exhaustion.
Race plus age = rage. Let's keep an eye on the age meme.
And the health meme.
Right?
What's the media? A personal question, to Chysey.
Can we talk about the 60 minutes interview?
I'm going to raise a false equivalency question.
Chysey about The View.
Here's : Frank Rich
You know the press is impotent at unmasking this truthiness when the
hardest-hitting interrogation McCain has yet faced on television came on "The
View." Barbara Walters and Joy Behar called him on
several falsehoods, including his endlessly repeated fantasy that Palin
opposed earmarks for Alaska. Behar used the word "lies" to his face. The McCains
are so used to deference from "the filter" that Cindy McCain later complained
that "The View" picked "our bones clean." In our news culture, Behar, a stand-up
comic by profession, looms as the new Edward R. Murrow.
Network news, with
its dwindling handful of investigative reporters, has barely mentioned, let
alone advanced, major new print revelations about Cindy McCain’s drug-addiction
history (in
The Washington Post) and the rampant cronyism and secrecy in Palin’s
governance of Alaska (in last
Sunday’s New York Times). At least the networks repeatedly fact-check the
low-hanging fruit among the countless Palin lies, but John McCain’s past usually
remains off limits.
Papa Bill vs. Eustace Tilley
Not many people have tried to compare Bill O'Reilly to the New Yorker, in terms of audience size and interested. But Rich did.
3rd fact
Of course, I read the radio section with great interest, especially the stuff about public radio, which often is not studied at all by commercial number crunchers [Arbitron].
In radio, there's a VERY important stat called TSL. I was astounded to find out that public radio's TSL is lower.
Addenda on my 2nd interesting fact
One thing I have concluded is: Pew has way too much power. Everybody uses their raw data. But it was interesting to see how some of the marketing people crunched this up. Am I a "knowledge worker?"
Here's more of that kind of thing.
My second interesting fact -- the feeble measurement of online news
I don't even think the Pew study is worded correctly.
For example, the 37 percent of people who got online news regularly/yesterday (and why are those the same thing?) is really -- when you see the chart -- really 37 percent of internet users. Which is not everybody.
For example, the 37 percent of people who got online news regularly/yesterday (and why are those the same thing?) is really -- when you see the chart -- really 37 percent of internet users. Which is not everybody.
How many of these Americans are going online specifically for news?
Nearly three-quarters of those who go online have used the medium at some
point for news in 2007, a percentage that has not changed over the past five
years, although the total the universe of online users has grown during this
time.
But, as was the case for more general use, the number going online
regularly for news is growing.
In late 2007, more than 7 in 10 Americans
(71%) said they went online for news, the same number reported in 2002,
according to the Pew Internet & American Life Project. But the number
who
reported going online more regularly has grown considerably. In the
October to
December survey, 37% went online yesterday for news, up from the
30% who did so
at the same time in 2005 and the 26% who did so in 2002. This
is the highest
number recorded by the Pew Internet project.
And then, I start wanting to know what "news" is.
Measuring the Internet has become increasingly complicated. As advertisers have
become frustrated by the lack of a universally accepted metric, a number of
alternatives have emerged.
Marketers are relying increasingly on data from
companies like Hitwise, an online measurement firm, rather than figures from
Nielsen//Net Ratings and comScore.
When we compared data from Nielsen//Net
Ratings and Hitwise for October 2007, there were some similarities, but a number
of important differences.
Yahoo News, CNN.com and MSNBC.com were the most
popular news sites in both lists. The New York Times was the most popular
newspaper Web site. Over all, 10 sites appeared in both sets of rankings.
Does it seem like they really know?
My first interesting fact from this week's homework
This took quite a bit of extra fussing around to nail down, but here it is.
In the Pew study, we read some rather depressing stats about the age of the television news audience. It even popped up kind of steeply in 2007 according to those bar graphs. Median age of 61. Yikes.
This seems like a solid argument against paying much attention to the nets, particularly when you look at the normal census-derived numbers about media voter age -- usually around 45.
But a more subtle analysis looks like this.
And here, you see:
In the Pew study, we read some rather depressing stats about the age of the television news audience. It even popped up kind of steeply in 2007 according to those bar graphs. Median age of 61. Yikes.
This seems like a solid argument against paying much attention to the nets, particularly when you look at the normal census-derived numbers about media voter age -- usually around 45.
But a more subtle analysis looks like this.
And here, you see:
"In 2004 those 18-29 were 21.8% of the population, while those 58-69 were just 13.2%. Add in the 11.5% 70 and up, and you get just 24.7% of "geezers" over 58 vs. 21.8% of "kids". But the sly old geezers know a thing or two about voting. Shift from share of the population to share of the electorate and the advantage shifts to the old: 18-29 year olds were just 16% of the electorate in 2004, while those 58-69 were an almost equal 15.9%. Add in the 70+ group at 13.4% and the geezers win hands down: 29.3% of voters vs 16% for the young. That difference is the power of high turnout. It goes a long way to explaining why Social Security is the third rail of American politics."
It might also explain why nightly news matters.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Reminder!!
A gentle reminder -- one of our duties this week is to ponder the question "What Is/Are The Media?"
Ýou can start here -- which is more from the point of view of who reads what.
And this was a stat from that study that charmed people.
Now -- here's the monster. Chew up as much of this as you can. Pull at least three facts out of it and put them up on your own blogs.
Want more? Want different?
This is a site a lot of journalists use to keep up with the buzz in the business.
Those of you who are more business-minded might like this blog -- mainly about the print biz.
This is an interesting article about the impact of cable on thie campaign.
I have never figured out what this is supposed to be, but you might get more out of it.
And here's a conservative media watchdog worrying about the way the morning shows are covering the campaign.
Ýou can start here -- which is more from the point of view of who reads what.
And this was a stat from that study that charmed people.
Now -- here's the monster. Chew up as much of this as you can. Pull at least three facts out of it and put them up on your own blogs.
Want more? Want different?
This is a site a lot of journalists use to keep up with the buzz in the business.
Those of you who are more business-minded might like this blog -- mainly about the print biz.
This is an interesting article about the impact of cable on thie campaign.
I have never figured out what this is supposed to be, but you might get more out of it.
And here's a conservative media watchdog worrying about the way the morning shows are covering the campaign.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Closer Now?
This guy has recently emerged as the hot new flavor of poll-synethsizer. We're not doing polls this week, but I wanted to put his post up because of the argument he makes about the press and how some members of it react to a close race. I'm not sure I agree, but it's an interesting argument.
John the Regulator
Watching the networks tonight I noticed that CBS did kind of a review of the two candidates' career perspectives on the economy. I thought it favored Obama a little bit, especially when it reported that Obama had seen at least part of the current crisis coming and had introduced legislation to try to prevent it. But it also stuch up for McCain in certain ways and rule against one of Obama's claims about him.
ABC, by contrast, ran a piece just taking McCain apart on the whole question of having historically opposed regulation and having gotten religion in the last 24 hours. The clips they showed were pretty damning.
Watch CBS Videos Online
ABC, by contrast, ran a piece just taking McCain apart on the whole question of having historically opposed regulation and having gotten religion in the last 24 hours. The clips they showed were pretty damning.
Watch CBS Videos Online
Drudgery
I've never seen this argument made before -- that Drudge plays a gigantic role in driving the agenda of cable coverage. What do you think about that? (I DO think that cable is more likely to get into the "silly" or peripheral stuff -- Carly, the Blackberry, Streisand being some of yesterday's fodder.)
0 items in your cart
Nice analysis from CSM about the perils of going off script.
Written in conection with the Fiorina mess.
Written in conection with the Fiorina mess.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
TV Watching
Tonight on CBS, Katie -- who is rumored to have secured the next Palin interview -- had an exclusive with Obama. She asked short questions and allowed him to give long answers. CBS seems to be going for access as its watchword. CBS and NBC both invoked "It's the economy, stupid" from 1992. CBS introduced a new feature in which the two candidates will be compared on a single issue.
ABC has basically the same feature.
NBC tried to make the race seem more heated, more fun. The McCain camp claim about fostering the development of the Blackberry was mentioned on NBC but not, I think, on the other two nets. There were clips of the two candidates zinging each other on NBC. They did a feature on raising money -- more of the horse race aspect -- and they -- as ABC I think did also -- got into the whole question of whether its bad to have Barbra Streisand raise $9 million for you. Is it so bad that, say, $8 million could not fix the damage? So you'd still come out ahead?
ABC has basically the same feature.
NBC tried to make the race seem more heated, more fun. The McCain camp claim about fostering the development of the Blackberry was mentioned on NBC but not, I think, on the other two nets. There were clips of the two candidates zinging each other on NBC. They did a feature on raising money -- more of the horse race aspect -- and they -- as ABC I think did also -- got into the whole question of whether its bad to have Barbra Streisand raise $9 million for you. Is it so bad that, say, $8 million could not fix the damage? So you'd still come out ahead?
Temper!
This is the thing we touched upon last night, as posted by Mike. The under-structure is that it's the work of Brave New Films, a project by Robert Greenwald. I'm not sure whether it's a 527, but it sort of functions that way. It's also utterly original, in that it's a big-name documentary film maker settingup a kind of workshop to make distributable (via YouTube) high-quality message videos. If you get involved with them, they also email you a lot about "new releases."
Barack Obama is not Sarah Silverman but ...
Check out Amanda's post on the role celebrities play in this campaign -- complete with video of Matt Damon, that home-wrecker!!!
Richard Cohen blows a gasket
A little more of what we talked about last night -- the story of the press turning on McCain and using the word "lie."
UPDATE: I thought about this some more -- and read Chey's post --and it seems to me that there's some layering going on. Interesting how Cohen takes what happened on The View -- which is not journalism -- and embraces it, without ever really having to take responsibility for getting the ball rolling, you know. I mean, Joy Behar is a stand-up comedian, more or lress, but she got in and got tougvher with McCain about the fact than many actual journalists dare to. It reminds me a little of the way Bob Costa surprised President Bush with a tough grilling in Beijing. And it also reminds me of the way mainstream journalists like to find a "softer" source to start the dirty work -- whether it's outing a politicians's extra-marital affair or calling somebody a liar.
UPDATE: I thought about this some more -- and read Chey's post --and it seems to me that there's some layering going on. Interesting how Cohen takes what happened on The View -- which is not journalism -- and embraces it, without ever really having to take responsibility for getting the ball rolling, you know. I mean, Joy Behar is a stand-up comedian, more or lress, but she got in and got tougvher with McCain about the fact than many actual journalists dare to. It reminds me a little of the way Bob Costa surprised President Bush with a tough grilling in Beijing. And it also reminds me of the way mainstream journalists like to find a "softer" source to start the dirty work -- whether it's outing a politicians's extra-marital affair or calling somebody a liar.
Monday, September 15, 2008
I dream of Cheney in my Maidenform bra
I like David Plotz, and he's always pushing the envelope. Here he seems to have decided that we're reacting to Palin at a much more subconscious level and that maybe that's one story the media is missing. Our post-rational take on Palin as expressed in our dreams.
Shooting Wolves in a Barrel and other memes
So Rich and Sarai don't like it when people shoot wolves from planes, but I also wonder if we are stumbling or bumping into one of those "competing visions of the West" mentioned here. The notion of The West may be an important one in this campaign.
Kevin has a couple of interesting things to watch.
Keep an eye on the things NOT covered, especially in this instance third and fourth party voices. Where did all these people go, and is it a mistake for the media to skip over them?
Also, let's watch the media war over the notion of change. But let's REALLY watch it. Who gets to decide, ultimately, which candidate commands that meme?
Ernie has just achieved lift-off. Let's put him in charge of tracking this whole question -- when did it become Obama vs. Palin? How can Obama get himself off that track?
Kevin has a couple of interesting things to watch.
Keep an eye on the things NOT covered, especially in this instance third and fourth party voices. Where did all these people go, and is it a mistake for the media to skip over them?
Also, let's watch the media war over the notion of change. But let's REALLY watch it. Who gets to decide, ultimately, which candidate commands that meme?
Ernie has just achieved lift-off. Let's put him in charge of tracking this whole question -- when did it become Obama vs. Palin? How can Obama get himself off that track?
When the ref is Oprah
I guess Emily makes me wonder WHAT exactly Oprah can and cannot be be made to do. Does she exist somewhere in the "normal" mainstream press continuum or is she outside and above it. If so, how? Should she be? I mean should she held to any particular standard of fairness? What regulates Oprah? (Is self-regulation how she maintains her brand name?)
Illegal use of the jaw
I like the concept of "working the refs" -- Joe's blog. What does that mean? How's it going?
Ladies' Night
So he has never met Clippy?
Caroline flagged this story about McCain and his use of computers and email. Some of the subsequent coverage looked at how McCain had explained that in the past. It seeems like a complicated question. McCain's war wounds probably inhibit his movements, but, as some writers to Goldberg noted, Stephen Hawking can use a computer.
Jack and Jill
Brent's locked onto a couple of interesting issues here.
a. the Greenberg photos. I don't think I've ever seen a photograhper do this particular kind of high-profile shit-disturbing in a campaign like this. But what else is this about -- the current vogue for (and there for acceptance of) photo-shopping malleability?
b. the health records petition. I wonder if people now start these petititons when they feel the media are not covering an issue they think is important.
a. the Greenberg photos. I don't think I've ever seen a photograhper do this particular kind of high-profile shit-disturbing in a campaign like this. But what else is this about -- the current vogue for (and there for acceptance of) photo-shopping malleability?
b. the health records petition. I wonder if people now start these petititons when they feel the media are not covering an issue they think is important.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
A gentle reminder
You''re getting your blogs up, and they look great. You all have a lot of opinions, but don't forget that your real job in this course is not to become bloggers who have opinions about the campaign itself but to analyze how the rest of the media views and frames the campaign.
For instance, this week, one of the memes that popped up again and again was that McCain was crossing some kind of line, especially in his commercials, that divides carefully slanted information from out-and-out lies. It's unusual to see the Associated Press taking that tack, and perhaps even more unusual to see Karl Rove saying it about a fellow Republican. I'm not sure how often the Army Times gets involved in something like this, but somehow, all over the place, "Is McCain going too far?" became a valid question for the press to ask. How was that handled? Where did it come from? What effect will it have on the campaign?
I should have mentioned this fact-checking site, which usually seems pretty nonpartisn to me. This week, they spent a lot of time fact-checking that meme.
For instance, this week, one of the memes that popped up again and again was that McCain was crossing some kind of line, especially in his commercials, that divides carefully slanted information from out-and-out lies. It's unusual to see the Associated Press taking that tack, and perhaps even more unusual to see Karl Rove saying it about a fellow Republican. I'm not sure how often the Army Times gets involved in something like this, but somehow, all over the place, "Is McCain going too far?" became a valid question for the press to ask. How was that handled? Where did it come from? What effect will it have on the campaign?
I should have mentioned this fact-checking site, which usually seems pretty nonpartisn to me. This week, they spent a lot of time fact-checking that meme.
Scooped!
Actually, I was feeling pretty good about getting that video up, and then it turned out Kasey beat me to it.
Blogless in Arizona
This is an interesting meme, and -- as you read the coverage -- the back and forth includes discussion of McCain's POW injuries and discussions of whether McCain ever cited those injuries as the reason he stayed off computers.
Friday, September 12, 2008
The ABCs of Palin
A lot of analysis of the Gibson-Palin encounter, ranging from his role -- were they more careful selecting him than they were in selecting her? -- to its actual content.
Conservatives tended not to like Gibson.
I found myself wondering if Gibson got pushed a little, beforehand, by bloggers more to the left, who thought he would be a patsy.
The Times looks at it two ways today, in addition to its main story.
Here.
And here.
And also wonders what happens when SNL gets going again.
Conservatives tended not to like Gibson.
I found myself wondering if Gibson got pushed a little, beforehand, by bloggers more to the left, who thought he would be a patsy.
The Times looks at it two ways today, in addition to its main story.
Here.
And here.
And also wonders what happens when SNL gets going again.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
The unbearable lightness of Sept. 2008
Not unreasonably, the WaPost thinks the campaign is getting bogged down in silly issues.
But who is doing the bogging?
But who is doing the bogging?
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Sticky Wicket
Hey, there, Rhetoric majors!!!
What do you think of Lipstickgate?
Ooops! Meghan says Dad uses that expression. (When kids have blogs!!!)
And Obama unleashes an older loaded phrase.
What do you think of Lipstickgate?
Ooops! Meghan says Dad uses that expression. (When kids have blogs!!!)
And Obama unleashes an older loaded phrase.
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Interesting
Greenwald at Salon has been doing some very interersting press criticism. Make sure you read this. And check the links.
My Dirty Little Secret
Last night, after class, I took off for a few days of much needed R&R in Truro. But I won't be billing the state for it.
I am, however, interested in the way Josh Marshall seems to be trying to track a Palin meme.
He even seems to feel he can shape it, by finding a familiar analogy.
ALSO -- Some of you may have hit an overestuffed mailbox when emailing me your urls. If so, try again. I did some cleaning here.
I am, however, interested in the way Josh Marshall seems to be trying to track a Palin meme.
He even seems to feel he can shape it, by finding a familiar analogy.
ALSO -- Some of you may have hit an overestuffed mailbox when emailing me your urls. If so, try again. I did some cleaning here.
Monday, September 08, 2008
The flow of themed sessions may change, especially depending on the availability of some of our guests from the outside. You'll meet, over the course of this semester, peoplewho work inside campaigns, people who cover campaigns, people who fashion advertising.
Assigments related to these sesions will be posted on this blog every week.
For now, the sessions go like this.
Sept. 15. What is a campaign? (See separate posting.) How campaigns have speeded up.
Sept. 22 What is/are the media? Who reads and watches what? What kind of shape are some of these media institutions in? How are some of the older media -- including cable TV --changing their missions?
Sept. 29 Who are the new players and how do they change the game? Politico and Huffington Post and some of other big web presences didn't even exist four years ago. But we'll also look at Wikipedia.
Oct. 6 Sex (roles) and the campaign. Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin and Michelle Obama and how they get covered.
Oct. 13 Humor. This was the year SNL, The Daily Show and the Colbert Report not only shaped coverage but attracted serious scruitny about the way they do that.
Oct. 20 Polls. How do they work? How do they get covered? What kind of coverage do they deserve?
Oct. 27 Advertising and fact checking of ads. Guest star: Ad guru Steve Wolfberg.
Nov. 3 Media Bias. We'll be talking about it all year long, but let's look hard at the specific charges.
Nov. 10. Election Recap.
Nov. 17 Race in the race. How did they cover it? And did it matter? Did anyone ever talk about ageism too?
Nov. 24 Talk radio, Fox news and the explicitly conservative media .
Dec. 1 What will 2012 be like, based on what we've seen this time? What will become more important? The information cloud?
Dec. 8. Final class. Heavy weeping.
Assigments related to these sesions will be posted on this blog every week.
For now, the sessions go like this.
Sept. 15. What is a campaign? (See separate posting.) How campaigns have speeded up.
Sept. 22 What is/are the media? Who reads and watches what? What kind of shape are some of these media institutions in? How are some of the older media -- including cable TV --changing their missions?
Sept. 29 Who are the new players and how do they change the game? Politico and Huffington Post and some of other big web presences didn't even exist four years ago. But we'll also look at Wikipedia.
Oct. 6 Sex (roles) and the campaign. Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin and Michelle Obama and how they get covered.
Oct. 13 Humor. This was the year SNL, The Daily Show and the Colbert Report not only shaped coverage but attracted serious scruitny about the way they do that.
Oct. 20 Polls. How do they work? How do they get covered? What kind of coverage do they deserve?
Oct. 27 Advertising and fact checking of ads. Guest star: Ad guru Steve Wolfberg.
Nov. 3 Media Bias. We'll be talking about it all year long, but let's look hard at the specific charges.
Nov. 10. Election Recap.
Nov. 17 Race in the race. How did they cover it? And did it matter? Did anyone ever talk about ageism too?
Nov. 24 Talk radio, Fox news and the explicitly conservative media .
Dec. 1 What will 2012 be like, based on what we've seen this time? What will become more important? The information cloud?
Dec. 8. Final class. Heavy weeping.
Sunday, September 07, 2008
Sept 15 -- What Is a Campaign?
For the themes half of the class, we'll discuss possibly the most basic question. What is it we're talking about when we talk about how the media covers a campaign. Whqat's supposed to happen in a presidential race?
There will be some spcial reading for that.
Is Roger Ailes right? Are there only three things that get covered?
There's an argument made here that what it takes to win is not what it should take to win.
Maybe a campaign is basically a meme war. To better under stand the term, read the first chapter of this terrific book on memes.
There will be some spcial reading for that.
Is Roger Ailes right? Are there only three things that get covered?
There's an argument made here that what it takes to win is not what it should take to win.
Maybe a campaign is basically a meme war. To better under stand the term, read the first chapter of this terrific book on memes.
Saturday, September 06, 2008
Workload and What You Need to Do Right Away
One nice thing about this course is that you don't have to buy any books, and you don't have to do a final paper.
The emphasis, instead, is what you do every week. Please understand that, because of that, I have very high expectations for your weekly output. It is impossible to coast along for most of the term and then put on a big charge in the last few weeks and still get a decent grade.
The first thing you need to do is either start a blog or adapt an existing blog so that you can do your homework on it. If you're on some other platform like livejournal and want to use its blogging function, that's fine, as long as there is a specificl url that takes us directly to a blog or page that is all about the course and not about your bffs or how many beers you pounded down last Friday.
I say "us" because that is one of the other unusual aspects of this course. You will all have access to each other's blogs. Commenting on each other's entries is good, provided said comments are constructive and not snarky. {If you're a total Luddite or if this concept scares you, talk to me. I bet we can get you going on a blog pretty darn quick. Your classmates will help. And you'll be surprised at how much fun it is. At first. Exceptions will be made, but only with great resistance from me.}
Try to blog every day . If I see posts for four or five days per week, I will be happy. If I see two posts for the whole week, I will be happy only if they are longer and chunkier and noteworthy for the way they synthesize themes and use links to support various ideas. If I see an output that is thin and sketchy, I will not be so happy.
Try to blog intelligibly and thoughtfully. But if you want to use informal, not-so-academic language in your posts, that's fine with me, provided it is done in order to support your insights and observations with zippy, entertaining prose. Remember, this IS the written portion of this seminar, so make it sing, dudes.
Another thing you need to do right away is make sure you have registration access to at least one major newspaper. It's probably a good idea to make cure you can get on the sites of the New York Times, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times with relative ease. The Wall Street Journal is trickier, but if it turns out we have at least one or two regular WSJ readers in the class, that will be great.
Every week the class will have two halves, although they will not always go in the same order.
One half will be a discussion pulling together all of what we have seen and gleaned from our media monitoring all week. The other half will focus on the theme we are exploring that week.
So let's talk about you media monitoring.
Each of you will be responsible for reading ALL of the political coverage in one major newspaper EVERY DAY. Not all of you will read the same newspapers. I will try to work as much as possible with whatever preerences you already have, but I will also divide you up into teams, so we make sure a diversity of newspapers is voered.
You must also, every day, look at Slate's Today's Papers feature. That will take you 30 seconds. While you are at Slate, you might as well poke around in their other coverage, which is very good. It tends to be read by a lot of other people in the business. One of the relatively new trends is that kind of "layering."
The big fish are often reading the smaller fish. In fact, that would be a cool thing to note in your blogs from time to time -- the way relatively minor players seem to be influencing coverage by (or even going into partnership with) better established players.
But I digress. If you get really obsessed with how newspapers are covering any one thing, I invite you to use this AMAZING tool, which allows you to look at all the front pages for any one day.
You must also spend 30 minutes day with some kind of television news. Again, the more diverse we are the better, and I will divide you up into teams based on what you already do. A network evening news or a cable show. THE DAILY SHOW DOES NOT COUNT. You should probably watch it anyway, as much as you can. And we will spend one week studying it and Colbert very closely.
You must also spend a few minutes every day with internet only content.
I would like you to stop in -- without necessarily becoming mired -- at one of the big ones like Daily Kos or Town Hall or Instapundit or peek at all the bloggers at the Atlantic site. But pick your poisons. You probably all have political blogs you like. I will ask you to commit to monitoring at least one of them.
So that's your bedrock monitoring commitment. Some newspaper, television and internet. And a daily or near-daily blog post sifting through your perceptions.
On top of that we will pile some content associated with each week's theme.
If that seems like a lot, all I can say is -- no books, no final paper, no exam. Work your ass off for me on a daily/weekly basis and we can all wave bye-bye on the last day of classes. What I'm really trying to do is build a weekly media hive in the classroom, where the bees teach each other. If we all do our work, we will be collectively as sharp about the topic of this class as anybody in America.
EXTRAS:
I could list 100 extra, but I will only list two.
If you look at this Pew site every day, you will get a good overview of our topic. Follow the links to learn more.
I look at Memeorandum about ten times day, five days a week. It in turn will lead you to some of the other biggies like Drudge and HuffPo and Politico. We will study them in depth one week, but feel free to look at them all the time.
The emphasis, instead, is what you do every week. Please understand that, because of that, I have very high expectations for your weekly output. It is impossible to coast along for most of the term and then put on a big charge in the last few weeks and still get a decent grade.
The first thing you need to do is either start a blog or adapt an existing blog so that you can do your homework on it. If you're on some other platform like livejournal and want to use its blogging function, that's fine, as long as there is a specificl url that takes us directly to a blog or page that is all about the course and not about your bffs or how many beers you pounded down last Friday.
I say "us" because that is one of the other unusual aspects of this course. You will all have access to each other's blogs. Commenting on each other's entries is good, provided said comments are constructive and not snarky. {If you're a total Luddite or if this concept scares you, talk to me. I bet we can get you going on a blog pretty darn quick. Your classmates will help. And you'll be surprised at how much fun it is. At first. Exceptions will be made, but only with great resistance from me.}
Try to blog every day . If I see posts for four or five days per week, I will be happy. If I see two posts for the whole week, I will be happy only if they are longer and chunkier and noteworthy for the way they synthesize themes and use links to support various ideas. If I see an output that is thin and sketchy, I will not be so happy.
Try to blog intelligibly and thoughtfully. But if you want to use informal, not-so-academic language in your posts, that's fine with me, provided it is done in order to support your insights and observations with zippy, entertaining prose. Remember, this IS the written portion of this seminar, so make it sing, dudes.
Another thing you need to do right away is make sure you have registration access to at least one major newspaper. It's probably a good idea to make cure you can get on the sites of the New York Times, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times with relative ease. The Wall Street Journal is trickier, but if it turns out we have at least one or two regular WSJ readers in the class, that will be great.
Every week the class will have two halves, although they will not always go in the same order.
One half will be a discussion pulling together all of what we have seen and gleaned from our media monitoring all week. The other half will focus on the theme we are exploring that week.
So let's talk about you media monitoring.
Each of you will be responsible for reading ALL of the political coverage in one major newspaper EVERY DAY. Not all of you will read the same newspapers. I will try to work as much as possible with whatever preerences you already have, but I will also divide you up into teams, so we make sure a diversity of newspapers is voered.
You must also, every day, look at Slate's Today's Papers feature. That will take you 30 seconds. While you are at Slate, you might as well poke around in their other coverage, which is very good. It tends to be read by a lot of other people in the business. One of the relatively new trends is that kind of "layering."
The big fish are often reading the smaller fish. In fact, that would be a cool thing to note in your blogs from time to time -- the way relatively minor players seem to be influencing coverage by (or even going into partnership with) better established players.
But I digress. If you get really obsessed with how newspapers are covering any one thing, I invite you to use this AMAZING tool, which allows you to look at all the front pages for any one day.
You must also spend 30 minutes day with some kind of television news. Again, the more diverse we are the better, and I will divide you up into teams based on what you already do. A network evening news or a cable show. THE DAILY SHOW DOES NOT COUNT. You should probably watch it anyway, as much as you can. And we will spend one week studying it and Colbert very closely.
You must also spend a few minutes every day with internet only content.
I would like you to stop in -- without necessarily becoming mired -- at one of the big ones like Daily Kos or Town Hall or Instapundit or peek at all the bloggers at the Atlantic site. But pick your poisons. You probably all have political blogs you like. I will ask you to commit to monitoring at least one of them.
So that's your bedrock monitoring commitment. Some newspaper, television and internet. And a daily or near-daily blog post sifting through your perceptions.
On top of that we will pile some content associated with each week's theme.
If that seems like a lot, all I can say is -- no books, no final paper, no exam. Work your ass off for me on a daily/weekly basis and we can all wave bye-bye on the last day of classes. What I'm really trying to do is build a weekly media hive in the classroom, where the bees teach each other. If we all do our work, we will be collectively as sharp about the topic of this class as anybody in America.
EXTRAS:
I could list 100 extra, but I will only list two.
If you look at this Pew site every day, you will get a good overview of our topic. Follow the links to learn more.
I look at Memeorandum about ten times day, five days a week. It in turn will lead you to some of the other biggies like Drudge and HuffPo and Politico. We will study them in depth one week, but feel free to look at them all the time.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Monday, August 18, 2008
Thursday, July 24, 2008
New media questions
Undernews?
If you click on the Slate links in this post, you will see Mickey Kaus mention the "under-news." I think we know, in a general way, what he means, but exactly what is -- and isn't -- the under-news. On the day of this writing, the Google NEWS serach engine does not seem to pull up Politico-com articles. You have to get them, I think, from a general web search. But that, in a mechanistic way, is an interesting statement. And it may not matter, because Politico articles are headed into the MSM anyway. But then there will be another Politico, outside the campfire.
Do the Dems rule the 'net?
This Politico article raises relevant questions about whether the GOP trails in new media. But how much of an impact do, for instance, TPM and HuffPo really make?
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Tim the Enchanter
We're going to have to discuss the death of Tim Russert. He was a far more controversial figure than the hagiography that followed his death could possibly convey. Read the comment threads on this article. But his death -- and the DAYS of coverage that followed -- seemed to be a funeral for more than just the man himself. We celebrate a thing when it's dying. More was dying than just Russert. But what? NPR's Tom Ashbrook devoted his show to the idea that Russert may have repreented the tail end of sober-sided grown-up journalism now being crowded out by the histrionics of Keith Olbermann. (And Chris Matthews.) Ashbrook and his guests rejected the idea that Russert's clubby D.C. centrism -- embodied in the idea that Carville and Matalin are legitimate sources of political perspective as opposed to cynical hired guns -- is itself a "point of view" imposed on fact-patterns.
Others detected in the Russert coverage a kind of self-loving within the media which seemed more energetic than the actual coverage of, you know, news.
Russert had, in the blogosphere, often stood for exactly the kind journalism that bloggers dislike. But most of them had to stay pretty quiet for a while.
Others detected in the Russert coverage a kind of self-loving within the media which seemed more energetic than the actual coverage of, you know, news.
Russert had, in the blogosphere, often stood for exactly the kind journalism that bloggers dislike. But most of them had to stay pretty quiet for a while.
Sunday, June 08, 2008
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
NPR on Clinton Coverage
This is one of the best things I've heard/read on the coverage of Hillary Clinton. The coverage of Clinton will be one of our first topics this fall.
Quote from the piece (in case the link goes dead):
The record often shows journalists and pundits do constantly describe Clinton in different terms than they would her male rivals. In interviewing voters for a focus group on the air earlier this year, Fox News Channel consultant Frank Luntz sought to learn what kind of campaign they wanted Obama and Clinton to wage.
"How many of you want them to really argue," Luntz asked. "And, how many of you want them to make love to each other?"
Just try imagining him putting Republican Arizona Sen. John McCain and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in that scenario. Or, consider whether conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh could sneak Joe Biden into this one:
"Mrs. Clinton's testicle lockbox is big enough for the entire Democrat hierarchy," Limbaugh told listeners, "not just some people in the media."
On the other side of the spectrum, MSNBC's Chris Mathews famously said Clinton was a senator and a plausible presidential candidate only because of her humiliation during her husband's presidency.
Friday, May 23, 2008
The dog that did not bark I
By this date in history, there was a low-level hum in the media about Hillary Clinton's performance and the way in which it was outpacing Obama's.
This could be looked at in terms of coverage.
Or votes.
Or electoral votes, both for her and for him.
But the media storyline was different. You may not have read very much about the above, and you may have read quite a lot about the Bobby Kennedy remark.
This could be looked at in terms of coverage.
Or votes.
Or electoral votes, both for her and for him.
But the media storyline was different. You may not have read very much about the above, and you may have read quite a lot about the Bobby Kennedy remark.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
More new media forms
In 2008, we saw the emergence of entirely new media forms.
Consider the Huffington Post. I can't really think of any obvious parallel or precursor to the way it blends blogging, mainstream-style commentary and the rather blurred use of Hollywood celebrities as news analysts.
Over at Brave New Films, documentary-maker Robert Greenwald decided that the development of viral videos was too important a thing to leave to chance.
Consider the Huffington Post. I can't really think of any obvious parallel or precursor to the way it blends blogging, mainstream-style commentary and the rather blurred use of Hollywood celebrities as news analysts.
Over at Brave New Films, documentary-maker Robert Greenwald decided that the development of viral videos was too important a thing to leave to chance.
Was the news coverage sexist?
That is the argument made by Hillary Clinton and her supporters in mid-May.
Here's a more detailed transcript, if you're interested.
Here's a more detailed transcript, if you're interested.
Monday, May 12, 2008
The Wild Rover and the Tenor of the Times
The New York Times looks at the way the mass media have blurred the line between operative and expert, using Karl Rove as Exhibit K.
And here's another resource, Media Tenor, with a sample item from today.
And here's another resource, Media Tenor, with a sample item from today.
Friday, May 09, 2008
Saturday, May 03, 2008
Tim and George. Do You Care?
Coverage of coverage!!!
The New York Times devoted a front page story to the rivalray between two Sunday morning hosts.
And I had a few extra thoughts.
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
EE Speaks Out
Last Sunday, Elizabeth Edwards summed up the frustration of many with the press coverage of this campaign.
And here are the letters on it.
I think one of the letters makes a good point that this is really a conspiracy among the media, lazy consumer of media, spin consultants and candidates themselves.
When I wrote a lengthy post depicting the electorate as hungry for the real truth about issues and urging Obama to stop being careful and really offer the voters some straight talk, a political consultant sent it back to me annotated, explainng that I was naive to suppose that a candidate could really speak his mind and move away from carefully focus-group-tested platitudes.
And here are the letters on it.
I think one of the letters makes a good point that this is really a conspiracy among the media, lazy consumer of media, spin consultants and candidates themselves.
When I wrote a lengthy post depicting the electorate as hungry for the real truth about issues and urging Obama to stop being careful and really offer the voters some straight talk, a political consultant sent it back to me annotated, explainng that I was naive to suppose that a candidate could really speak his mind and move away from carefully focus-group-tested platitudes.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Media Matters
Media Matters has a slightly different history and function than PEJ, but I'll let you figure out the details.
Introducing PEJ
Here's a site that tries to quantify the campaign coverage.
This particular page looks at the way McCain was covered while the Democratic primary was on high heat.
This particular page looks at the way McCain was covered while the Democratic primary was on high heat.
Night of the Generals
This isn't really a campaign story, but it raised one of the darkest questions yet about what, exactly, we're seeing when we watch television news.
ABC's very bad day, followed by the fickle finger
Before the PA primary, Clinton and Obama debated on ABC prompting a kind of Bastille moment, when some people seemed to lose patience with the scandal-obsessed media. ABC, of course, disputed the criticism.
Not that the media was completely chastened. Almost immediately, there was a smaller fuss over whether Obama, in reacting to the debate days later, had surreptitiously given Clinton (or someone) the finger.
And then there was Zapruder-like analysis proving he hadn't. Note in the comments that some people immeidately anaologized to Seinfeld's "the pick." This was one of many moments people seemed to feel they had already seen somewhere else in pop culture.
Not that the media was completely chastened. Almost immediately, there was a smaller fuss over whether Obama, in reacting to the debate days later, had surreptitiously given Clinton (or someone) the finger.
And then there was Zapruder-like analysis proving he hadn't. Note in the comments that some people immeidately anaologized to Seinfeld's "the pick." This was one of many moments people seemed to feel they had already seen somewhere else in pop culture.
Sunday, March 30, 2008
The YouTube Campaign
Here's a Frank Rich column claiming, among other things, the primacy of the internet -- specifically video clips -- in this election. Rich describes:
the accelerating power of viral politics, as exemplified by YouTube, to
override the retail politics still venerated by the Beltway
establishment ...
That Mrs. Clinton’s campaign kept insisting her Bosnia tale was the truth two days
after The Post exposed it as utter fiction also shows the political perils of
20th-century analog arrogance in a digital age. Incredible as it seems, the
professionals around Mrs. Clinton — though surely knowing her story was false —
thought she could tough it out. They ignored the likelihood that a television
network would broadcast the inevitable press pool video of a first lady’s
foreign trip — as the
CBS Evening News did on Monday night — and that this smoking gun would then
become an unstoppable assault weapon once harnessed to the Web.
The Drudge
Report’s link to the YouTube iteration of the
CBS News piece transformed it into a cultural phenomenon reaching far beyond a
third-place network news program’s nightly audience. It had more YouTube views
than the inflammatory Wright sermons, more than even the promotional video of
Britney Spears making her latest “comeback”
on a TV sitcom. It was as this digital avalanche crashed down that Mrs. Clinton,
backed into a corner, started offering the alibi of “sleep
deprivation” and then tried to reignite the racial fires around Mr. Wright.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Let's go to the tape
Today's New York Times carried a story about a paradigm shift. The preference for having unedited video to look at and play with, alongside your news story.
“We’re talking about a generation that doesn’t just like seeing the video in addition to the story — they expect it,” said Danny Shea, 23, the associate media editor for The Huffington Post (huffingtonpost.com). “And they’ll find it elsewhere if you don’t give it to them, and then that’s the link that’s going to be passed around over e-mail and instant message.”
Slate magazine thought that was pretty obvious.
“We’re talking about a generation that doesn’t just like seeing the video in addition to the story — they expect it,” said Danny Shea, 23, the associate media editor for The Huffington Post (huffingtonpost.com). “And they’ll find it elsewhere if you don’t give it to them, and then that’s the link that’s going to be passed around over e-mail and instant message.”
Slate magazine thought that was pretty obvious.
Back to the past: Yesterday, in a column that surveyed the way people get political information from the Internet, the WSJ's Lee Gomes went mid-'90s on his readers to talk (of all things) e-mail technology. The paper noted that e-mail is "an easy and effective way for people to share ideas with friends about what might be going on with the candidates." TP thought it couldn't get much worse than that, but then today's Page One (!) NYT story comes along, where Brian Stelter reveals that (brace yourselves here) people, and more specifically "younger voters," are "not just consumers of news ... but conduits as well." That means these young people send out stories and videos to their friends, who often share stuff as well so they all keep each other informed. "In one sense, this social filter is simply a technological version of the oldest tool in politics: word of mouth." Exactly.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Election reporters cover elections
As the campaign rages on, the war in Iraq seems to be less of a story ...which may affect the election.
Thursday, March 06, 2008
One Picture Is Worth ...
This is the picture that (cropped a little differently) adorned the New York Times front page the Thursday aftertheTexas/Ohio victores for Clinton.
Independent Ads
As we look at the role advertising plays, we'll be looking at the increasing importance of independent ads. Here's an early NPR piece that focuses on how they're funded.
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
The Tina Fey Factor
One of the remarkable developments in Feb/March was the Clinton campaign's turning to comedy shows, especially SNL, for leverage in shifting the tone of coverage and selling the meme that Obama was getting "a pass" on tough questions. Obama, after the March 4 primaries said he clearly needed to have a conversation with Tina Fey. Was this really what changed the coverage? Not everybody agreed.
When this article was posted on
Tuesday on The New York Times Web site, several readers said the news media had
been unfair to Mrs. Clinton. Many said reporters had not been tough enough on
her. Many also focused on the role of “Saturday Night Live.”
“The line
between politics and entertainment has become almost fatally blurred now, and I
am uncomfortable with that,” a reader wrote. “SNL is NOT journalism, and it’s a
sad statement that a late night comedy show might have a greater impact on our
political path than a debate.”
Another reader wrote: “Don’t kid yourselves,
the media didn’t suddenly have some revelation because of SNL. They are trying
to sink Obama to keep this race, which they seem to love more than life itself,
going. SNL just provided them a justification.”
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Saturday, December 09, 2006
Just a couple more things
I want to return, if we have time, to Swarm Intelligence, aka the hive mind, aka digital maoism. Read that essay and these responses. A lot to chew on.
And then, if you want to follow the advertising boys better, here's a good site to visit. I use it a lot these days.
And then, if you want to follow the advertising boys better, here's a good site to visit. I use it a lot these days.
Jeez, Is He EVER Gonna Post About the Last Class???
Finally, yes. One question that has been nagging me a bit is this: Are blogs an exciting new medium now the way they were scant years ago? The answer is yes only if people are finding new ways to work with them. Take a look at these, which represent, in most cases, attempts to tweak the way a blog works.
Also coming to the last class will be Steve Wolfberg and Tom Bradley from Cronin to talk about the imact of all this new media on the advertising world and about what works and what doesn't.
Also coming to the last class will be Steve Wolfberg and Tom Bradley from Cronin to talk about the imact of all this new media on the advertising world and about what works and what doesn't.
Monday, December 04, 2006
SNS Live
An aside: with each passing day I realize I am not really qualified to teach this class. Look at the conferences I don't go to. Hey, lots of people had lots to say this week, so check out everybody else's stuff. I''m just going to make sure we have quick cuts to MySpace, LiveJòurnal, Friendster, Facebook, and ... God help me ...it turns out we're old and ugly and marking time until death ...eons. Sara thought LJ had some interesting communities of interest, but I would observe that Wikia may be doing the same subject better. Certainly, this is Sara's idea of heaven. I wonder if the smaller, more lcosed model may ultimately be mre effective. Renee pointed out this.
B to the Lizzogg
My man Scotty-B kept it real this week. Chck out his blog and click on all the lizz-inks. Especially 'Sheed. Wud up, 'Sheed?
Sunday, December 03, 2006
Blogger Still Broken.
Can't believe I have to handcode.
OK, This article from the WSJ gives you some sense of the problem facing something like MySpace. Scale. Scale. Scale. And spam and inauthenticity.
This article may be even more paranoid than Jason Scott. I'm just tossing it in here for the hell of it.
This sort of gives you a sample of how much information you can move on one MySpace page. (I'm just waiting for the "I never meant this to beused in a class!" wail.
But it's not all young people getting personal, huh? WARNING, the scary song does not go away right away. And also, this is just kind of scary in general.
OK, This article from the WSJ gives you some sense of the problem facing something like MySpace. Scale. Scale. Scale. And spam and inauthenticity.
This article may be even more paranoid than Jason Scott. I'm just tossing it in here for the hell of it.
This sort of gives you a sample of how much information you can move on one MySpace page. (I'm just waiting for the "I never meant this to beused in a class!" wail.
But it's not all young people getting personal, huh? WARNING, the scary song does not go away right away. And also, this is just kind of scary in general.
Saturday, December 02, 2006
This Week
I hope it is needless for me to say that this week, as we study MySpace and other social networking sites, you really have to put your toe into at least one, especially if you have never joined one before. I joined Eons, which is proving to be kind of boring. But look at them all. And then REALLY look at at least one.
There's starting to be a fair amount of scholarship about all this.
This guy focuses on Facebook.
I would give you more, but blogger is sort of broken at the moment and I am having to hand code in the links.
There's starting to be a fair amount of scholarship about all this.
This guy focuses on Facebook.
I would give you more, but blogger is sort of broken at the moment and I am having to hand code in the links.
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Communities
The brash and brazen -- but nonetheless helpful -- Suzan has found a very good article for us to read.
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
We've done it again!
We have upset somebody, although I am, frankly, surprised this time, inasmuch as I spent the last ten minutes of class raving (semi-incoherently) about how great this was.
Monday, November 27, 2006
Lucy in the Sky
This person could easily be a big star in blogging, IMHO. I'm going to keep my eye on her. Thanks, Cosmo. Boy, livejournal never looked so bangin', huh?
Sunday, November 26, 2006
The Kind of Blog That Pisses Scott Off...Pisses Off Scott?
I was looking at a lot of art in New York City this weekend ... at MoMa and in the galleries around Chelsea too. And it made me think about blogs-as-art. And whether bloggers are just kind of opting-out of artistry. From the Steve Himmer essay I linked below:
The latitude allowed a weblogger, over time, to unfold the many aspects of his or her life and personality, and to do so in the same space in which they offer commentary on politics and culture, is a luxury not afforded to journalists or even novelists: discrete, commodifiable work requires a purpose, a point, or at the very least a markable focus. This is not to say, however, that the self presented on a weblog is a “complete” or even an accurate one: just as in journalism, memoir, or fiction, decisions are made about what to include and what to exclude. The weblogger, in that sense, can be read as fictional, as a character, in precisely the same ways that Andy Rooney or James Joyce can be—furthering the collapse between factual and fictional, public and private, and distinct genres in general. The play of time in the weblog allows for the presence of what Walter Benjamin calls an “aura,” the work’s “presence in time and space, its unique existence in the place where it happens to be. This unique existence of the work of art determined the history to which it was subject throughout the time of its existence” (p. 222). The weblog—rather, the weblog as it was in the moment before the most recent addition or change—cannot be reproduced: it is inextricably bound with its moment of production, and that moment is lost when a new moment occurs in its place.
But that got me to thinking about a potentially Scott-off-pissing blog about which last year's class obsessed for a while. We went back to its beginning and thumbed around in it and could not decide how much of it was real. Since then, I see she kept it going, though a title change that happened right here. And here it is today. But she seems to epitomize some of the issues discussed in the essay, which continues:
That the weblog is always in process, never completed, can be read as both its greatest strength and, in another way, its weakness as a form. Burger (1995) argues that the project of the avant-garde is to collapse the distinction between the art object and the process of its creation, that art (and the creation of art) should be integrated into the practice of everyday life. “What is negated,” Burger writes,
is not an earlier form of art (a style) but art as an institution that is unassociated with the life praxis of men. When the avant-gardistes demand that art become practical once again, they do not mean that the contents of works of art should be socially significant. The demand is not raised at the level of the contents of individual works. Rather, it directs itself to the way art functions in society, a process that does as much to determine the effects that works have as does the particular content. (p. 49)
The latitude allowed a weblogger, over time, to unfold the many aspects of his or her life and personality, and to do so in the same space in which they offer commentary on politics and culture, is a luxury not afforded to journalists or even novelists: discrete, commodifiable work requires a purpose, a point, or at the very least a markable focus. This is not to say, however, that the self presented on a weblog is a “complete” or even an accurate one: just as in journalism, memoir, or fiction, decisions are made about what to include and what to exclude. The weblogger, in that sense, can be read as fictional, as a character, in precisely the same ways that Andy Rooney or James Joyce can be—furthering the collapse between factual and fictional, public and private, and distinct genres in general. The play of time in the weblog allows for the presence of what Walter Benjamin calls an “aura,” the work’s “presence in time and space, its unique existence in the place where it happens to be. This unique existence of the work of art determined the history to which it was subject throughout the time of its existence” (p. 222). The weblog—rather, the weblog as it was in the moment before the most recent addition or change—cannot be reproduced: it is inextricably bound with its moment of production, and that moment is lost when a new moment occurs in its place.
But that got me to thinking about a potentially Scott-off-pissing blog about which last year's class obsessed for a while. We went back to its beginning and thumbed around in it and could not decide how much of it was real. Since then, I see she kept it going, though a title change that happened right here. And here it is today. But she seems to epitomize some of the issues discussed in the essay, which continues:
That the weblog is always in process, never completed, can be read as both its greatest strength and, in another way, its weakness as a form. Burger (1995) argues that the project of the avant-garde is to collapse the distinction between the art object and the process of its creation, that art (and the creation of art) should be integrated into the practice of everyday life. “What is negated,” Burger writes,
is not an earlier form of art (a style) but art as an institution that is unassociated with the life praxis of men. When the avant-gardistes demand that art become practical once again, they do not mean that the contents of works of art should be socially significant. The demand is not raised at the level of the contents of individual works. Rather, it directs itself to the way art functions in society, a process that does as much to determine the effects that works have as does the particular content. (p. 49)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)