Partisan blogs are for hacks
Blogging, as a new form of media, is dead.
A concept that once had the potential to challenge mainstream media, has been bought, sold, and replicated to the point that it's not even interesting any more. Outside of a few independent thinkers (Andrew Sullivan off the top of my head), readers know what they're going to read before they even punch in www.dailykos.com.
Need proof?
Here it is.
Josh Nelson, a loyal Kossack (so much so that he went to Vegas for their convention), went out of his way to provide media coverage for a significant political event (a Ralph Nader book signing). He decided to take his alternative coverage to the popular Daily Kos and he was, essentially, given the hook.
Apparently, if something isn't singing the praises of "alternative" Democrats like Howard Dean or John Edwards, it's not worth of the pages of the mighty Kos.
I can't help but wonder, what's the entertainment value of reading a Web site that only showers praises on one party and treats anything else as evil? What's the intellectual value of only reading people who agree with you? More importantly for these activists turned media, what's the political value of only discussing the issues with people who already are on your side?
If you want to listen to people that think the same way you do, why not just sit in the bathroom and listen to your own echo?
A concept that once had the potential to challenge mainstream media, has been bought, sold, and replicated to the point that it's not even interesting any more. Outside of a few independent thinkers (Andrew Sullivan off the top of my head), readers know what they're going to read before they even punch in www.dailykos.com.
Need proof?
Here it is.
Josh Nelson, a loyal Kossack (so much so that he went to Vegas for their convention), went out of his way to provide media coverage for a significant political event (a Ralph Nader book signing). He decided to take his alternative coverage to the popular Daily Kos and he was, essentially, given the hook.
Apparently, if something isn't singing the praises of "alternative" Democrats like Howard Dean or John Edwards, it's not worth of the pages of the mighty Kos.
I can't help but wonder, what's the entertainment value of reading a Web site that only showers praises on one party and treats anything else as evil? What's the intellectual value of only reading people who agree with you? More importantly for these activists turned media, what's the political value of only discussing the issues with people who already are on your side?
If you want to listen to people that think the same way you do, why not just sit in the bathroom and listen to your own echo?
Labels: media, National Politics
