Before radio there was print, before television there was radio, and before the Internet there was television. Media conglomerates, mergers, and ownership concentration threatens the independence of news outlets and the objectivity of information we receive from these news outlets. Such concentration of media wealth by a few corporations is dangerous, and it threatens democracy. Although the Internet is not as free as it once was, it is not as easily controlled or manipulated as the other platforms for disseminating information are.

Perhaps the most important community living within the Internet is the blogsphere. Blogging in pajamas covered with Cheetos dust is a stereotype for the type of environment from which a blogger constructs, researches, and delivers his news. Traditional media, using this stereotype will attack bloggers for holding them accountable for misinformation. Think Progress discussed how MSNBC’s Morning Joe, host Joe Scarborough attempted to defend an erroneous comment by John McCain. Joe Scarborough attacked the blogsphere for holding John McCain accountable for wrong assertions:

Also during this segment, Scarborough attacked liberal bloggers for correcting McCain’s error, saying they were probably “just sitting there, eating their Cheetos” and saying, “Let me google Anbar Awakening!” He added, “Dust flying — Cheeto dust flying all over. They’re wiping it on their bare chest while their underwear — you know, their Hanes.”

Blogging is and has become essential to the dissemination of opinion and news. The freedom of most bloggers is unprecedented and has become an essential element in giving back people their voice at the grassroots level. Essentially, anyone can be a blogger. However, this characteristic of the blogsphere is targeted as making blogs less credible than elite journalism. Nonetheless, a large army of credible bloggers exists.

Blogs have several important characteristics that traditional media lacks. Perhaps the most important characteristic is that blogs form social and peer networks. Additionally, blog content is normally free of charge and lacks sanitization, since blog authors have more freedom than traditional media outlets. The platform from which information is disseminated is unique too. Readers often get to know their authors more intimately, and blog authors are normally more accessible than traditional journalists. The best blogs and bloggers do not manipulate the news to impose their agenda. Blogs should present the facts and make objective arguments based on what they believe and researched. Contrarily, although their formal attire isn’t covered in Cheetos dust, the media has been caught manipulating or sanitizing stories, and the blogsphere does a good job holding them accountable.

I am not arguing that blogger content is perfect and impervious to manipulation or that traditional media should be abandoned completely. Alternatively, individuals should be supplementing their news from several sources. I constantly read and listen to blogs and newspapers from across the political spectrum. As a result, I feel more informed.

Traditional media in the form of radio, television, or online content (sans the blogsphere) is still relevant, because they are still essential to our democracy’s health, since traditional media is at the forefront of investigating and delivering information. However, bloggers are gaining more access to information and sources once exclusive to the elite media.

The Achilles’ heal of traditional media is sensationalism and control from media conglomerates. Important politics and policies have been entirely missed, and the truth has been manipulated. With journalistic ethics, Ivy League degrees and privity to information or exclusivity, traditional media should be held at a higher standard or scrutiny. I believe bloggers are important, because they scrutinize the media, since what the media produces is essential to blog use and discourse. As a result, the media often criticizes bloggers. Ta-Nehisi Coates tackles blog hate by analyzing remarks made by Jonathan Alter:

I find it fascinating that this view is coming from a guy who makes his living giving opinions in print, on TV and online. But let’s allow that dog its nap–for today. There are many things wrong with Alter’s analysis, but let’s begin with the fact that Alter is basically taking the top 5 percent of print journalism–a mature form that’s had a chance to iron out its wrinkles–and comparing it to the worst of a very new form. It’s true that “anyone can sit at home pontificating in their PJs,” but not everyone does it well, which is why some bloggers attract an audience, and some don’t. Moreover, the idea that blogging consists of simply spouting off is moronic and reductionist. The first thing I discovered–and this has been repeatedly rammed home to me–is just how much reading I have to do in order to be credible. Frankly, I still don’t do enough. But the sheer amount of info you have to absorb, in order to be good, is pretty incredible. The best bloggers may not pick up the phone much–but they do research. It’s just not clear to me that talking to some bureacrat is anymore revelatory than reading a ton. It’s probably best to do both.

But there is a more problematic notion in Alter’s take. As I said it’s true that anyone can sit at home in their underwear pontificating, but it’s equally true that anyone can pick up the phone and call a mid-level bureaucrat. Folks, the word of the day is credentialism. I’m always amazed that people think it takes years of study at an Ivy, and then more years at a J-school, to learn how to use a phone and structure a story. I learned the basics of journalism during a three month internship, at an alt-weekly in Washington, D.C. when I was 19. That was almost 13 years ago, and the rudiments of the craft–the tenacity and courage to hunt for facts, and an eye for the counterintuitive–have not changed. Journalism isn’t like, say, medicine. You can teach kids the basics of journalism–that’s why they have high school newspapers, but not high-school brain-surgeons.

The blogsphere has been absolutely essential in conducting the War on Fox News by holding the channel responsible for its blatant biasness and its ostensible reasoning. Fox News is an excellent example of unbiased journalism that has regressed into biased opinion media. Their viewership is extremely large, so Fox News has a great responsibility, but when I watch Fox News I am disgusted by what I see and hear. Fox News is not journalism. It’s a completely different species. Fox News is about marketing, control, and twisting information to allow individuals or groups impose their agenda. Furthermore, the channel has been essential in shaping the liberal versus conservative argument. Apparently, Scott McClellan must have been visited by the Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come, because he has made several detrimental claims or revelations against the White House. Most recently he said that the White House fed Fox news talking points.

To learn more, I recommend the documentary, Orwell Rolls In His Grave (you can watch the complete documentary below, which is about 105 minutes in length) is directed by Robert Kane Pappas. The documentary explores the “relationship between the media, corporate America, and government” by asking: “Could a media system, controlled by a few global corporations with the ability to overwhelm all competing voices, be able to turn lies into truth?” It certainly can.

From the Pew Research Center: The Changing Newsroom: Gains and Losses in Today’s Papers