Sound n' Sight

MPI social media guru debate highlights changing face of journalism

(photo by istolethetv)

Over the past week I have watched a fascinating blog debate which I believe highlights the rapidly changing face of journalism in the world today. It revolved around the contracting of "social media gurus" by MPI (Meeting Professionals International) for coverage of its World Education Conference in Vancouver this week.

MPI invited events industry bloggers who were also MPI members to apply to be "social media gurus" (SMG) at the event. Those chosen received reduced registration fees in exchange for blogging, tweeting and writing about WEC. However on the SMG application MPI stated that it "expects fair and unbiased coverage."

It seems the crux of the controversey centers around that "fair and unbiased" expectation and whether or not MPI meant to or should try to to muzzle their SMGs opinions.

This debate highlights the changing and confusing state of news media in the world today. Once upon a time you had to go to college, get a degree and then be hired as a journalist to have your news stories or column read and valued by the public.  Now thanks to the internet, news gate keepers are obsolete. Anyone can publish a blog and build up their own readership. 

Because the rise of the internet, blogging and citizen journalism have so recently abolished the old rules, we are in a period of time where new rules haven't yet been determined. Everyone is flying by the seat of their pants, many doing their best to embrace the change but not sure yet how to go about it.

It might be helpful to take another look at the players involved, the old roles and the new roles that are emerging.

What is a blogger?

Short for "web log"  the blog began as an online journal, of sorts, in the 90's. In recent years, thanks to the rise of "citizen journalism," the blog has emerged as a formidable news source. Possibly due to its roots as a personal "journal", the blog tends to retain a very personal format.  By mainstream media standards it's more akin to an editorial or column in which the writer gives his or her own take on a subject.  It's usually written in the first person and makes no apologies about taking a particular stand on issues. Bloggers are thus usually columnists, by traditional media standards.  Like popular columnists, bloggers can be very influential, depending on the numbers and kinds of readers they attract. 

How is a blogger different from a reporter?

A traditional mainstream news reporter went to college and, among other things, was trained to:

- craft a news story using the inverted pyramid format (most important information at the top, least important information at the bottom.)

- understand and respect his/her role as a news gate keeper and government watchdog

- appreciate the importance of researching and validating every piece of information printed beneath his or her byline

- revere the concept of "objectivity" in reporting the news

Bloggers often have none of this "training". Whether that's a good or a bad thing is debatable, in my opinion.  But for the sake of this article, let's focus on the topic of "objectivity" and how it relates to bloggers.

Getting both sides when reporting a news or feature story is a time-honored and for the most part useful tradition. It helps to ensure a well-rounded article that is approached with an open mind, rather than with a pre-determined agenda. 

The trouble comes when reporters believe that writing an objective story means making both sides look equally credible, despite the facts. Or when reporters use their dedication to objectivity as an excuse for lazy reporting by merely regurgitating equal numbers of quotes from both sides of any issue.  There are two sides to the "Is breathing good or bad for you?" question. However, the facts speak louder than anyone's opinion.

So I have a bit of an issue with this dedication to "objectivity", particularly with regard to how it's been practiced by the mainstream media within the last decade. Enter bloggers - a group of enthusiastic writers with opinions and no such limitations.

As I said before, bloggers are most like mainstream media columnists.  Only now that more and more people are turning to the internet to get their news, bloggers aren't just confining there blog posts to opinions.  Bloggers are actually writing articles full of news and information that's helpful. And sometimes they are providing BETTER coverage than mainstream media.

Events are a particular favorite for bloggers to cover. In addition to our blogs, we use Twitter, Facebook, Foursquare, etc. to document an event and  give our take on it.  An event that is covered by influential bloggers gets gobs of publicity targeted specifically to the people  who would be attending if they could.  So the benefits to the event can be enormous.

However, bloggers, by definition, will likely be giving their opinions mixed in with that coverage. As opposed to a reporter who would write up a news or feature story with "objectivity" as one of his or her main goals. 

Should bloggers and reporters be treated equally?

When I was employed as a journalist, I was offered free, I repeat, FREE access to countless events and was asked for nothing in exchange. As a journalist, I could write whatever I felt moved to write, as long as I remained dedicated to "objectivity" and my editor agreed to it.

Was this fair? Well, considering the kind of impact a news story, review or column (written by an uninterested party) can have on any business, yes. I believe such freebies are a wise investment on the part of anyone organizing an event. Even with the possibility of a bad review, the benefits far outweigh the potential risks. And, really, expecting anything in return for these freebies only serves to taint a journalist's credibility.

Should organizations like MPI extend such priviliges to bloggers? Because their readers trust them, a blogger's endorsement can be gold to an event. So I believe giving press passes to certain bloggers is one of the best and cheapest ways to get quality publicity. However some special considerations should apply:

* The organization or event must accept the fact that bloggers, by definition, will include their own opinions about whatever it is they are blogging about. 

* Since events are likely to be inundated with requests for free or discounted registration, organizers would do well to carefully monitor leading bloggers in their industry and extend invitations only to the most influential blogs. This can be partially determined by total number of subscribers/followers and number of industry thought leaders who are subscribers/followers.

Social media may still be in its infancy but as we all know from the polls and studies, it has already changed the fabric of our lives. We ignore it at our own peril. Personally, I will be reading all I read about WEC in blogs and articles I find on the web.

Some may lament the dearth of what was traditionally known as "objectivity" in news coverage by bloggers. However, from the standpoint of someone who wants publicity for an event, having bloggers there who are free to become brand ambassadors can have great advantages.  Yes, they are also free to become your worst critic, but so are reporters. And think about it. What catches your attention more, an endorsement from someone you trust? Or a "fair and unbiased" news article?

Is MPI buying positive social media mentions for WEC?

Being a social media guru isn't without it's challenges

Is MPI gaming the social media gurus for positive press plus salmon?

Is MPI's social media guru program a winning idea?

Bloggers vs Journalists is over

If you enjoyed this post, please consider subscribing to the RSS feed for Sound n' Sight. 

If you enjoyed this post, please consider subscribing to the RSS feed for Sound n' Sight.