The Worst Story Ever Written (About Blogs)

Holden already posted about the study itself, but this piece about the study is such a splendid bit of wood that I had to pull it out for further discussion. By which I mean, Jesus H. Roosevelt Christ:

A majority of Americans do not read political blogs, the online commentaries that have proliferated in the race for the U.S. presidency, according to a poll released on Monday.

Only 22 percent of people responding to the poll said they read blogs regularly, meaning several times a month or more, according to the survey conducted by Harris Interactive.

In the first place, the whole story could have been "one in four Americans reads political blogs, which is ... pretty damn good, actually, for a thing that's really only been a big deal since 2003 or so (when First Draft went online, which as we all know is the date of the birth of the universe and all creatures within it). But no, it's "most people don't give a fuck." Technically true, but ... just as easy to go the other way, and with the rampant insecurity and bitchitude going on in journalism today, I gotta say, it's not hard to see how somebody made that decision.

Then we have "even if people do read blogs," they SUCK:

Unlike traditional, mainstream media, blogs often adopt a specific point of view. Critics complain they can contain unchecked facts, are poorly edited and use unreliable sources.

What critics? We do not know. The reporter doesn't tell us. Apparently it's one of those things, like "the sky is blue" and "Democrats are weak on national security" that is so obvious we don't need to cite a source of any kind to just blurt it out there and attribute it to "critics." And all blogs, apparently, are subject to all these complaints. Equally. At once. I take offense. First Draft contains no unchecked facts. In fact, we do our best to contain no facts at all, just insults and cock jokes. And ponies.

Seriously, it's like TPM's Polk award never happened. It's like we don't link to the gaggle transcript so y'all can see for yourselves if we're making shit up. It's like you can't use your brainmeats to find out if something's true your own self, just like in the rest of the entire world ever oh my god. You want to see poorly edited? Check this motherfucker out. Ain't nobody in blogworld got a monopoly on "poorly edited."

But but but but, blogs REALLY SUCK:

Despite the attention blogs can get, the poll said 56 percent of Americans say they never read blogs that discuss politics. Another 23 percent read them several times a year, the survey showed.

SO THERE, BITCHES. REUTERS UBER ALLES!!!!!

I need a nap now.

A.

Comments

[Jude]

Hmmm.

Now what's this story missing?

Oh, that's right. Context.

Silly me.

[BuggyQ]

If blogs were newspapers, they wouldn't be in this position. Blogs happen to be very lucky to be what they are./geraldine ferraro

[getaclue]

yup, yup, nobody reads blogs. that's why teevee newz and deadtree pubs are doing so well.

/snark

[pansypoo]

have they done studies on people watching teevee gnews?

how the fuck are they better?

[Interrobang]

nobody reads blogs. that's why teevee newz and deadtree pubs are doing so well

Call this part "Kill Your Newspaper" if it gives me the right sort of countercultural cred, here.

It seems to me that the 22% of Americans who read blogs probably are either a big chunk of American traditional-media news consumers to start with, or else the blogs have been siphoning off a lot of their audience. Hell, I've lost count of the number of times someone's mentioned some news story or other and I've said, "Oh, yeah, I saw that three weeks ago on [blog]." Funny how that works, isn't it?

[slim]

And how many Americans read newspapers these days?

From Zogby: "Just 7% of those age 18 to 29 said they get most of their news from newspapers, while more than twice as many (17%) of those age 65 and older list newspapers as their top source of news and information."

[Robert Earle]

I live in an apartment building with 36 units. There are two, or maybe three, units that hava a subscription to the LA Times, and maybe two or three more that get the local paper (now famous, thanks to Geraldine Ferraro) the Daily Breeze.

Six out of 36 is 16.7%.

[Athenae]

Well, and I think the hostility is so unnecessary. There's no reason to get all pissy and defensive about bloggers, unless you're insecure about your own work, in which case, don't need a blogger to see where you're going wrong.

People don't read blogs because the Internets is Teh Shiny, they read blogs because blogs have content people want. Newspapers get readers the same way, or should, anyway. Everybody should just do what they're good at and STFU, far as I'm concerned, but certain people in traditional journalism spend all their time bitching about us political bloggers like we're a disease ... dude, if we're that bad, why are you dignifying us with your righteous fury? Go learn to knit or something.

A.

[Angelos]

Hell, I've lost count of the number of times someone's mentioned some news story or other and I've said, "Oh, yeah, I saw that three weeks ago on [blog]."

Holy crap yes!!!

It usually takes 4 days to get from [blog] to CNN.com, than another week or so to make my local newspaper.

[PortlyDyke]

It usually takes 4 days to get from [blog] to CNN.com, than another week or so to make my local newspaper.

If it gets there at all. The MSM is terrified by the blogsphere -- that's my view. It threatens their right to sole control of information --- and information is power.

Every time I see this crap, I chuckle to myself -- it's a sign of how powerful blogging actually is. You don't do studies on gnats.

Well, OK, some people do. There's probably a blog about it, too.

[AnB]

also, that is taken with listed numbers, right? I wonder what habits the 18-28 with land-lines demographic has

[JoAnne]

I think even fewer Americans watch any of the Sunday morning talk shows like "Meet the Press". But these shows are considered very, very important, because the people who are most interested and involved in politics do follow them, carefully.

Then those people talk to other people, and so on.

[joejoejoe]

Doesn't this mean that blogs have at least as many readers as any form of the printed word? 40% of America reads one or less books a year that isn't required for school or work and 50% of people 18-24 don't read at all for pleasure.

[Elayne Riggs]

My favorite was "Unlike traditional, mainstream media, blogs often adopt a specific point of view. Critics complain they can contain unchecked facts, are poorly edited and use unreliable sources." UNLIKE traditional mainstream media? Why on earth do the mainstream media think blogs are so ubiquitous? It'll be really nice if they ever get that log out of their eyes.