• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What is the difference between a media outlet and a blog?

radcen

radcen

Phonetic Mnemonic ©
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2011
Messages
34,817
Reaction score
18,576
Location
Look to your right... I'm that guy.
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
What is the difference between a media outlet and a blog?

For the purposes of this thread, a blog is a news reporting or political or social issue blog. Not stuff like knitting and cooking.

The difference is not as simple as may seem on the surface. A media outlet reports the news and (sometimes) delves deeper into issues and causes and investigates. Doesn't a blog do the same thing?

On the other hand, a blog is (usually a single) a person's opinion, ostensibly based at least in part on fact and actual events and/or issues. But, given the bias so widely demonstrated by the media, isn't that essentially what they're doing, too?

Ok, media outlets are usually established and send people to events and locations, and a blogger is often sitting at home viewing media outlets as their source, but other than that, I'm not seeing a whole lot of difference between the two, at least in terms of output and what we the public sees. Both media outlets and bloggers have ones that are credible and ones that are less so, so either way you still need to do your own due diligence. Just because it's one or the other does not automatically establish or discount credibility simply because of which one they are.

Really, blogging may well be "the new media".
 
radcen said:
What is the difference between a media outlet and a blog?

For the purposes of this thread, a blog is a news reporting or political or social issue blog. Not stuff like knitting and cooking.

The difference is not as simple as may seem on the surface. A media outlet reports the news and (sometimes) delves deeper into issues and causes and investigates. Doesn't a blog do the same thing?

On the other hand, a blog is (usually a single) a person's opinion, ostensibly based at least in part on fact and actual events and/or issues. But, given the bias so widely demonstrated by the media, isn't that essentially what they're doing, too?

Ok, media outlets are usually established and send people to events and locations, and a blogger is often sitting at home viewing media outlets as their source, but other than that, I'm not seeing a whole lot of difference between the two, at least in terms of output and what we the public sees. Both media outlets and bloggers have ones that are credible and ones that are less so, so either way you still need to do your own due diligence. Just because it's one or the other does not automatically establish or discount credibility simply because of which one they are.

Really, blogging may well be "the new media".
Click to expand...

Though, not all news media outlets are equally professional most will have a quality control system in place. These systems have problems of their own, but they will usually err more through ommission than inventiveness.
 
When people consider outlets like the Huffington Post "media", that just shows the danger in loose reporting standards. HuffPo practically invented the evolution of the blog-column, nearly perfectly mimicking their "legitimate" rebranded AP selections which were already extremely cherry picked and wholly one sided.

I don't consider any talk show on any network any differently. And I think having these shows on "news" networks blurs that line between legitimate and whatever realm blogs fall into.
 
When people consider outlets like the Huffington Post "media", that just shows the danger in loose reporting standards. HuffPo practically invented the evolution of the blog-column, nearly perfectly mimicking their "legitimate" rebranded AP selections which were already extremely cherry picked and wholly one sided to begin with.

I don't consider any talk show on any network any differently. And I think having these shows on "news" networks blurs that line between legitimate and whatever realm blogs fall into.
 
radcen said:
What is the difference between a media outlet and a blog?

For the purposes of this thread, a blog is a news reporting or political or social issue blog. Not stuff like knitting and cooking.

The difference is not as simple as may seem on the surface. A media outlet reports the news and (sometimes) delves deeper into issues and causes and investigates. Doesn't a blog do the same thing?

On the other hand, a blog is (usually a single) a person's opinion, ostensibly based at least in part on fact and actual events and/or issues. But, given the bias so widely demonstrated by the media, isn't that essentially what they're doing, too?

Ok, media outlets are usually established and send people to events and locations, and a blogger is often sitting at home viewing media outlets as their source, but other than that, I'm not seeing a whole lot of difference between the two, at least in terms of output and what we the public sees. Both media outlets and bloggers have ones that are credible and ones that are less so, so either way you still need to do your own due diligence. Just because it's one or the other does not automatically establish or discount credibility simply because of which one they are.

Really, blogging may well be "the new media".
Click to expand...

Blogs are people spreading their own honest opinions about subjects.

"A media outlet" is a professional organization that allows individuals to to write about topics.

Despite your assertions, a "media outlet" does not necessarily delve deeper into issues and causes and not all of them even do any investigating. "Media Outlets" have a degree of prestige about them since there are supposed to be standards while blogging rarely does.
 
Here's what Stephen Colbert has to say about one particular branch of "media outlets" that I'll refer to as The MSM. I know you aren't limiting "media organizations" to just the MSM and so I want to be clear that I'm differentiating them as well...
Over the last five years you people were so good — over tax cuts, WMD intelligence, the effect of global warming. We Americans didn't want to know, and you had the courtesy not to try to find out.
Click to expand...

The press secretary announces those decisions, and you people of the press type those decisions down. Make, announce, type. Just put 'em through a spell check and go home. Get to know your family again. Make love to your wife. Write that novel you got kicking around in your head. You know, the one about the intrepid Washington reporter with the courage to stand up to the administration. You know — fiction.
Click to expand...
As you can see, the MSM is a particularly deviant form of media organization because despite having the highest status and the biggest budgets, they're often guilty of doing the laziest types of journalism: copy/pasting talking points and calling it news.
 
Bloggers work for ego, they can be on any article that allows them.

MSM must have either print or network or cable distribution.

Thus Drudge and Huffpo are websites, not MSM, but "media". Or so it seems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom