Whinge from Hill Cone says a lot

If you have ever listened to Deborah Hill Cone on radio you wonder why she has ever got laid with the amount of whinging she goes on with. Speaking of whinges, she has just had a whinge published (pdf) in the Business Herald on Friday. The irony of it all is that it is a whinge about bloggers and about this blogger in particular and it isn’t online.

DHC in actuality is just too lazy and ill disciplined to have a blog despite having all day to sit at home and write. She used to masquerade as a business journo but now masquerades as a quasi-gossip columnist. But still wishes to be known as pseudo-intellectual.

Another thing…..I find it really hard to trust people with two surnames, just make your mind up already.

Now onto her pathetic drivel she calls an article.

Actually Peter Creswell has a good fisking of her that I will pinch some of;

Deborah Hill-Cone suggests in today’s Business Herald that “bitter bloggers” who lambast the mainstream media for its manifest failings are duty bound to solve old media’s problems for them, i.e., to shed some light on “how the [mainstream] media might turn a buck so we [the royal “we”?] can fund quality journalism.”

Ironically, her column is not online, so her audience have to rely on bloggers to retype it all for her, but here’s her main beef, that;

“all this old versus new media aggro is just a distraction from the fact that neither [bloggers nor] Rupert Murdoch . . . have an answer for the future of journalism.”

Well, it’s not like I’m duty bound to solve all the problems for the profession of journalism (there’s more than enough in my own profession of architecture, thanks very much), but here’s a simple enough solution for the old media — so simple that even a journalist might understand: Recognise the division of labour, boys and girls, and just report the news. We, the bloggers, can get on with commenting on the news, since that’s what we do best; and you get on with finding and reporting the news, since that’s what you’re supposed to do best.

In other words:

  • don’t editorialise;
  • don’t pontificate;
  • don’t ask how people feel, ask instead what they saw;
  • don’t report events as if people are outraged, just report the events themselves;don’t report what “celebrities” do as if it matters a damn;don’t report puff pieces about actors/musicians/writers as if they’re not just puff-pieces for their new film/album/book;
  • don’t report what everyone knows is just spin) — report instead what’s being spun, and the news that someone is spinning, and who;
  • don’t assume the whole world has the same values as your friends;
  • don’t just rewrite press releases as if they were news;
  • and don’t create the news yourself. In short, just report the news. All of it. As if the truth actually mattered.
  • Your role model in this new endeavour should not be Woman’s Day, which the front pages and the Six O’Clock News more and more resemble, but the classic private detective whose motto should be hung over your desk in copperplate lettering: “Just the facts, ma’am.”

We need look no further than the scandal engulfing Labour in the UK and the pathetic efforts of the MSM journalists that Guido (a blogger) has exposed or to this weeks Sunday papers that wrote exclusively about a pathetic weak man who belted a bunny-boiler and got caught. Where was the analysis of how New Zealand can help Fiji? Well that was up to the blogs and new media again.

DHC’s article is really an article about how she can wangle to still get paid…essentially because she writes for wages and so she acts like a wages slave. Bloggers on the otherhand write because they want to and do it without payment and mostly for fun. Sure it would be good to get paid but then you are in the hands of your paymaster and so give up some independence. And that my dear readers is the nub of it all.

DHC and other journalists that may blog, euphemistically described as Blo-Jo’s by Cactus Kate, would like to think they write independently of their paymasters but the fact that they have editors belies this figment of their imagination. The closest any Blo-Jo gets to this is probably Colin Espiner who is more free on his blog than other blo-jo’s. The fact that MSM outlets are trying to emulate bloggers just goes to show that bloggers have already won the battle, we are now fighting to win the war and eventually there will come a time when a payment model will work.

For all her whinging in her article shows just how little she understands Social Media and where technology andwriting is heading. She shows that by whinging about my, and Barnsley’s, attack on journalists abusing people on Twitter and thinking they are indestructible. For those who missed it Damian (with an A) Christie called Michael Laws a cunt on Twitter, when called on it he shut down the account and then spent a considerable amount of time explaining just how coincidental it all was shutting down using Twitter which he thinks sucks and also how he still thinks Laws is a cunt. The difference between Christie and me is I write cunt while he writes c***. Then there was Herald on Sunday journalist Jono Milne who sniggered about school girl getting “legless” and driving, when they had just written an article about a girl who had her legs amputated after her boyfriend smashed then up in his car. Anyway the point I was trying to make that clearly sailed over the heads of DHC and Damian (with an A) Christie is that Twitter isn’t private and what they did (especially Jono Milne) was the equivalent of being a psych nurse and twittering that your patients are fuckwits. They whine about bloggers and when they act like bloggers and get caught they try to claim they are journalists.

The bottom line is that journalists like to think they have ethics and yet the evidence is that in reality they all think ethics is a county in Souther England and doesn’t apply to them. Bloggers actually, in general, both left and right have more integrity and ethcis than all of the journalists combined.

Yes they get paid, and that is why they should act and follow the rules that they live under. I’m paid by no-one but myself and so I get to set the rules and generally I make then up as I go along. If I don’t like the rules then even better I get to change them. Journalists just get to do what every wage slave does if they don’t like the rules, get huffy, quit, and go work for someone elses rules. They very rarely actually work for themselves or take a risk.