Blogging vs Twitter vs Journalism

via Andrew Bolt and Lead and Gold. I commented yesterday about the differences between bloggers and journalists, this post?continues?that exploration so the terminally dim can get a grasp on the concepts.

Blogging was a direct attack on MSM hegemony at both the micro (fisking) and macro levels (explanation space). I just don’t see Twitter as the same threat. It is a flood of unmermorable chatter that is easy to ignore. Blogging had the potential to break the power of the MSM guild. Bloggers, at their best, presented arguments. Arguments can both change minds on the immediate subject and undermine the credibilty of those establishment pundits who present weak cases on a regular basis. (Yes, i’m looking at you Brooks and Frum).

At a minimum, blogging brought a lot of outsiders to the pundit/editor game. Twitter seems more useful as a way for insiders like Kurtz to extent their brand and magnify their voice.

It is one of those quirks of history. One new thing is revolutionary. The next new thing consolidated the position of the powers that be.

The MSM hated blogs, and in New Zealand they?have?tried to slag bloggers off but at the same time try to make?journalists?into bloggers. They are yet to make the leap that has happened int he US, the UK and in Australia where blogs and the bloggers themselves have been acquired and integrated, outside of editorial control but part of the family.

Witness now the large number of stories that the MSM picks up off Twitter or blogs.