Political News Feeds
- The latest news releases from Tennessee political parties, candidates and elected officials. If your feed needs to be included here and isn't, let us know.
TN Department of Education Announces School Counselor InstituteEducating the Whole ChildNASHVILLE – The Tennessee Department of Education is proud to announce the fifth annual Tennessee School Counselor and Administrator Leadership Institute beginning next week in Murfreesboro. This year’s theme, “The 360 Approach: Educating the Whole Child,” addresses the critical need of ensuring that our students are both college- and career-ready. read more [Link]
Governor Bredesen, Commissioner Kisber Announce Expansion of VW Supplier in TennesseeSL Tennessee, LLC to Invest $35 Million and Create 300 New Jobs in Clinton NASHVILLE – Governor Phil Bredesen and Economic and Community Development Commissioner Matt Kisber today joined with executives of SL America to announce a $35 million expansion of SL Tennessee, LLC, a company subsidiary operating in Clinton, Tenn.. The expansion will create 300 new jobs and add ... [Link]
Devaney Statement on Tennessee Democrat Reps Voting to Raise U.S. Debt Limit Another $1.9 TrillionNASHVILLE, TN – Tennessee Republican Party Chairman Chris Devaney issued the following statement after Tennessee Democrats voted to raise America’s debt limit by $1.9 trillion which follows a vote in December to raise the debt limit by $290 billion: “Tennessee Democrats just don’t get it,” said Devaney. “Once again, President Obama and Speaker Pelosi have won out over hard-working families ... [Link]
Recreation Initiative Program Grant Cycle Announced; Workshop Slated for March 3NASHVILLE – The Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation is soliciting Tennessee Recreation Initiative Program grant applications from local governments that do not currently have parks or recreation departments. TRIP grants help communities create recreation opportunities for citizens by assisting with the establishment of a parks department. Applications are due April 15, 2010, and award recipients will be announced in ... [Link]
Print This Post
Aug
6
Coverstone’s Blogger Double Standard
By Clint Brewer | Filed Under Miscellaneous, Nashville Blogosphere, Nashville Mayoral Race, Polling
Private school administrator Alan Coverstone commits some obfuscation in taking to task my post here - a push back to those in the extended media community – fellow print journalists, televisions journalists and bloggers alike – who doubted our SurveyUSA polling numbers in the Nashville mayoral race.
In the process of his dissertation about the origins of the Spiro Agnew phrase I used in jest – ”nattering nabobs of negativism” – Coverstone employs some revisionist history and glosses over the simple fact the citizen journalists in the blogosphere should be by Coverstone’s own standards guilty of the same alleged transgressions Coverstone sees in the traditional media.
For some reason, however, Coverstone lets his fellow bloggers off the hook.
For starters, Coverstone should try some of the same fairness he calls for from our newspaper and others in his own coverage. Somehow, Mr. Coverstone has parsed down three references in my above referenced blog post with links provided to three very different kinds of journalists and through his own prose made my post all about bloggers. I’m not sure how he reached that conclusion, but the substance of the original post in question does not support it. From Mr. Coverstone’s blog:
Today, it is bloggers who try to hold the mainstream press accountable. The nattering nabobs of negativism were the good guys when they held Agnew accountable, and it seems to me that nabobs in this case may well do the same thing with a press that has lost its way a bit.
One problem here, Alan. Two of the three “nabobs” I mention were members of the MSM, you being the exception. You are ,of course, welcome to your own opinion but not your own set of facts. The links were plainly provided to a television station, a newspaper reporter and Coverstone’s blog. My original post dealt with a broad cross section of critics from three different media platforms two from the MSM – not just bloggers.
If Coverstone also wants to bemoan the lack of coverage in the dreaded MSM of “issues” in the mayoral race and a bent toward covering horse race politics, he might need to also focus his fire on some of his own. Almost every blogger in Middle Tennessee writing about the mayors race blogged about our poll. In some cases, they blogged more than once about the numbers and their meaning. Some were even openly thankful when I provided the cross tabs. These same bloggers also blogged at length about two other polls offered by Channel 2. In my opinion, they should have. By Coverstone’s logic, they were in the wrong. Shouldn’t Coverstone also take to task the blogging community he holds in such high esteem? In Alan’s eyes, shouldn’t they be just as guilty – if not more so – of covering the “horse race” politics of the mayoral race as was this newspaper or the rest of the traditional media in the city?
Also, I don’t remember bloggers writing stories or blog entries they reported themselves about the mayoral race field’s views on education, immigration, sewer infrastructure, municipal planning, a downtown convention center or half a dozen other “issues” we tracked for months in news stories. There was, of course, no mention of that in Coverstone’s blog nor any credit given to our newspaper.
Finally, I would make the argument that the money we spent on our poll was a public service. So was the largely excellent coverage the non-shill members of the Nashville blogosphere gave the poll and mayoral race in general.Engaged voters simply do not want to throw away their vote in an election this tight. For instance, when you have two very well qualified progressive candidates – Briley and Karl Dean – that was a hard choice for some people. If Dean has traction and Briley does not, many folks I know at least appreciated that information from an empirical source. They wanted to know their best bet for getting a progressive in office. Based on the numbers, it was not Briley.
Comments
125 Responses to “Coverstone’s Blogger Double Standard”
Comments Policy: The City Paper does not moderate comments before they appear on Nashville City Blogs and bears no responsibility or liability for comments posted by our readers. We do use an automatic spam filter and a dirty-words scrubber to screen out foul language. Comments with more than three hyperlinks may be automatically rejected as spam. Please stay on topic and play nice. Foul language and personal attack are not welcome here and egregious violations may result in your comment being deleted.
Leave a Reply
[...] what you want about the issues discussed or who is right and who is wrong, but for the editor of a one of our city’s major papers to [...]
I’m going to jump in here and side with Clint on this. His only misjudgment in all of this may be engaging this criticism in the first place, though I’ve been known to defend my newspaper too when it’s being unfairly attacked. Most bloggers wouldn’t last an hour under the journalistic quality control that a newspaper demands.
[...] “Most bloggers wouldn’t last an hour under the journalistic quality control that a newspaper demands.” -Liz Garrigan, Editor-in-Chief, Nashville Scene [...]
You two crack me up.
Liz, when you talk all tough like that, it kind of makes me swoon just a little.
[...] My Internet Crush of the Week Filed under: About Town — Aunt B. @ 3:21 pm Y’all, I cannot resist a person with swagger. I just can’t. And to watch Liz Garrigan walking all over the internet like she’s packing ten thick inches ab…. [...]
[...] Brittney offered up this post this afternoon. This is the entire post. Sometimes it is really so that brevity is the soul of wit: “Most bloggers wouldn’t last an hour under the journalistic quality control that a newspaper demands.” -Liz Garrigan, Editor-in-Chief of the Nashville Scene, a paper that printed fabricated information a… [...]
Just one more instance of bloggers exercising not an ounce of curiosity, which is confounding. For folks who seem so obsessivly interested in the world around them, I’d think they’d want to pick up the phone now and then. There’s only one blogger in Nashville who has ever written about the Scene (or me personally) who has actually reported, and that’s Adam Kleinheider. He has my respect for that. I don’t read the others, but folks send me links from time to time, and the content almost never bears any likeness to reality.
Though I haven’t challenged the cyber myth being perpetuated for weeks now about my political reporter Jeff Woods, I will now. Some weeks ago, Woods spoke with a homeless volunteer about the “urban plunge” event in which mayoral candidates participated. Woods was both covering the mayoral campaign and running the news side of the paper while I was on maternity leave. The volunteer told him something that he then called the Howard Gentry campaign to confirm. Woods and the campaign never hooked up. At that point, given that he didn’t have confirmation that what the volunteer said was true, Woods should have pulled the item altogether. That was in fact his intent. But he got busy with shepherding other stories, and that didn’t happen. It wasn’t a “fabrication” by a long shot. We simply made a mistake.
Gentry received personal apologies from both me and Woods. We also corrected our error in both the print and online editions of the paper. Never has a blogger posting egregiously inaccurate content about the Scene ever reacted in kind.
Thanks for noticing my work. I never claimed it to be anything but my opinion. In my opinion, the logic of your long post doesn’t hold very well, but I never intended to get into a contest with anyone, and I’m not going to start now. I’ll stick to my simple observation that polls are as likely to shape elctions as reflect opinions, and the horse race does not give us good leaders who try to solve problems. It gives us politically conscious leaders who often resist bold initiatives to avoid a dip in the polls. Now, I am not speaking of anyone in particular here, I am simply expressing a pretty common view. So, if the poll stories really are counterproductive, then your spending money on the poll is not a public service at all.
Nevertheless, I am trying to point out some other views not attack anyone’s ethics. I understand how and why polls sell newspapers, and I give you full range to make the decsiion to print them. I just think I ought to be allowed at least the same latitude to express my personal opinion on that decision. I will remind you that my blog does not identify my place of employment, and I did not state my opinions in any official capacity. I speak only as a citizen of Nashville with a personal stake in how our city is governed because I live here.
Still, I stand by my opinions, and I am glad you are willing to discuss it as well.
Never has a blogger posting egregiously inaccurate content about the Scene ever reacted in kind.
Since when is criticism of the food writer “egregiously inaccurate content”? That, and bemoaning the ’second-class citizen’ approach the Scene has with bloggers grates on me.
For instance, you say:
“There’s only one blogger in Nashville who has ever written about the Scene (or me personally) who has actually reported, and that’s Adam Kleinheider.”
What kind of reporting would you have me do? Would you like me to call Kay West directly and ask her why she has a size-ist agenda? Would you like me to call your office and ask you why you continue to print homophobia under the guise of humour with the YASNI contest?
Somehow I get the feeling that your staff would be too busy “sheperding other stories” to take my phone calls–or at least take them seriously.
How exactly do you expect bloggers to “report” if our efforts to do so aren’t going to be given professional consideration from the outset? You, the Editor In Chief have gone on record several times with broad-brush dismissals of blogging as subprofessional. We know that, and don’t expect a professional response from within your paper.
Hence, the stand-off.
[...] Liz Garrigan explains how a fabricated anecdote made its way into the pages of the Nashville Scene: Though I haven’t challenged the cyber myth being perpetuated for weeks now about my political reporter Jeff Woods, I will now. Some weeks ago, Woods spoke with a homeless volunteer about the “urban plunge” event in which mayoral candidates participated. Woods was both covering the mayoral campaign and running the news side of the paper while I was on maternity leave. The volunteer told him something that he then called the Howard Gentry campaign to confirm. Woods and the campaign never hooked up. At that point, given that he didn’t have confirmation that what the volunteer said was true, Woods should have pulled the item altogether. That was in fact his intent. But he got busy with shepherding other stories, and that didn’t happen. It wasn’t a “fabrication” by a long shot. We simply made a mistake. [...]
“Never has a blogger posting egregiously inaccurate content about the Scene…”
Care to give examples? I’ve never seen or heard a Scenester mention any untruths or inaccurate content about their paper written by a blogger.
Also, despite your explanation about why the fabrication made it into print, it was indeed a fabrication. Gentry’s communications director said the information about his candidate was entirely false. Your own retraction says as much: “The Scene incorrectly reported last week that Vice Mayor Howard Gentry, while spending the night on the streets with homeless people to learn about homelessness, was turned away from the Nashville Rescue Mission. *In fact, the anecdote the Scene recounted never happened.* Gentry never asked the mission to let him sleep there, and he instead walked past the mission and spent the entire experience on the streets.”
Now, I never said that Woods made up the printed falsehoods, but he did go to print with them. Ergo, the Nashville Scene printed fabricated falsehoods. Spin if you’d like, but that fact remains.
Katherine, when my phone rings, I pick it up. I have never recoiled in the face of questions. If you have them, call me and I’ll do my best to answer them. But I have no problem with subjective criticism the liks of which you peddle, characterizations about the Scene, Kay West, me or anyone else on staff. That’s just the stuff of the Interweb, and appropriately so. Opinion is just that. You’re not required to find our YASNI winners funny, and I don’t care of you call us homophobic. I’m really talking about posts that purport to know what’s happening over here, how decisions are made — anything that claims to know the facts.
There are several bloggers in town whose stuff I read and respect: besides ACK, Brainsted, Mancini, O’Connell and Abramson come to mind. But that’s about it. I’m not sure a non-relationship with someone I’ve never met could be called a standoff.
*I’m really talking about posts that purport to know what’s happening over here, how decisions are made — anything that claims to know the facts.*
Care to give examples?
“Most bloggers wouldn’t last an hour under the journalistic quality control that a newspaper demands.”
Way to bridge that Gap Liz. Fantastic. Bloggers are easily the most well read of your readership base, and in one sentence you unfairly malign the entire group.
And the newspaper industry wonders why it’s slouching towards irrelevancy. Look no further than Queen Liz, goddess of the truth in print for your answer.
Note to Liz: insulting your readership base is not a good way to increase the number of eyes on your paper. And believe it or not, there are journalists at newspapers who have lied and weren’t caught until bloggers pointed it out. Bloggers are doing the job that YOU NEWSPAPER PEOPLE have stopped doing, so don’t give me this crap about what we could or couldn’t handle. Get off your horse already.
In fact, it was a blogger who caught the fabrication about Howard Gentry:
http://seanbraisted.blogspot.com/2007/06/wrong-column-perhaps.html
Not sure Liz would remember you if she had met you, Katherine. We were introduced at a (gasp!) blogger meet-up, then several months later she asked Kleinheider in the WKRN newsroom “which one is Brittney?” Bloggers must not make very lasting impressions.
I’m not sure a non-relationship with someone I’ve never met could be called a standoff.
You may have never met me or Aunt B. or Klinde or BadbadIvy or Sarcastro or…etc.
But we are your readers. We have a relationship with you as active consumers, in that we take an ongoing interest in your product.
I find it amusing that you think it cool to keep slinging in our direction, all the while pretending we don’t matter. Yet, somebody there reads us because I keep receiving emails about how something I’ve written has made this or that person cry.
Goodness, we have strayed far from the original discussion. Thanks, Liz, for your words earlier in the thread.
Since we have opened a whole can of worms here, let me get off a few point while folks are paying attention. This does not have to do with Mr. Coverstone so much, and it is not an indictment of blogging as a whole. Let me simply talk about the Nashville blogosphere.
For some strange reason – which I have not witnessed in other markets in my travels – there is this ongoing sense of vitriol by some bloggers in Nashville directed toward this city’s newspapers. Brittney, you typically lead the charge.
There is lots of talk locally about a new media revolution and blogs taking over and newspapers being on the way out. OK, fine, I’m sure that makes everyone feel great. The truth is that if you stuck your heads up and looked out across this country your would find that ALL journalists are now Internet journalists. Every medium out there – newspaper, television, radio and online – go to the Internet first in most if not all cases with the bulk of their hottest news. And if they don’t go there first as in the case of local television, then they get it there almost immediately thereafter.
My point is that all of the working media professionals in this conversation are now Internet journalists first and everything else comes second. The moment of blogging as some kind of citizen-based answer to newspapers has already passed. Newspapers caught up. Arthur Salzburger plainly said he may not be publishing the New York Times in hard copy edition in another five years, and that he doesn’t really care. Our publisher here said much the same thing publicly when we launched our new series of websites.
What DOES have a future is actual citizen journalism. Not talking about your cats or putting pretty pictures of flowers from your windowsill on your blog or griping about your non-boyfriend, but reporting. Kleinheider, Hobbs, S-Town Mike, Mancini, Brainstem and others do some actual, honest to goodness reporting. That has a future because it offers valuable content. It could even make money.
Here is the problem with the Nashville blogosphere – most of you don’t do that. Instead, under the guise of being “media watchdogs” you make uninformed assumptions about our work. In fact, most of you wouldn’t have anything to blog about if the newspapers didn’t publish.
I share Liz’s experience. The only blogger who has ever actually picked up a telephone and asked me a question is A.C. Everyone else just makes assumptions based on who knows what and lets it fly. Liz holds some bloggers in disdain because they deserve to be.
To fabricate means to invent. We did no such thing. Someone told us something false, and we made an honest mistake by printing it as our calls to verify were out. We took responsibility for it. There are no parallels to Jayson Blair, who sat in his apartment and engaged in creative writing.
As for falsehoods printed about the Scene, I can’t answer all this stuff and don’t have any desire to. If we did that, we wouldn’t get anything done.
Examples? Off the top of my head, some of what bloggers have written that I know about: 1) all Scene blog posts must be approved by me. False. There’s no time for someone who runs a paper to see everything that goes on the blogs. 2) I flew on a taxpayer-financed trip to Greece with the mayor and my husband. False. I’ve never been to Greece and certainly wouldn’t go with the mayor. 3) The Scene’s news hole is shrinking. False. 4) We ignored the Kijiji coffeehouse closing. False. A blogger (helpfully) pointed it out (which I acknowledged), we made the change in our database and then we discovered that the database wasn’t importing our content revisions.
Brittney, my apologies if I hurt your feelings. I’m sure you’re not forgettable. If it makes you feel any better, I meet people all the time who can’t remember having met me. I think I probably have one of the most forgettable faces in town.
My overriding point on this thread, which, by the way, is an enormous time suck, is that, though we’re fallible, newspapers and journalists do commendable work. I wish more bloggers would take it upon themselves to do original reporting rather than sit behind their keyboard and sling arrows while demonstrating no real curiousity about the truth.
The only blogger who has ever actually picked up a telephone and asked me a question is A.C. Everyone else just makes assumptions based on who knows what and lets it fly. Liz holds some bloggers in disdain because they deserve to be.
I think that is a fair criticism, and its something I wish I could do more of. I know personally, I work 8-5, so therefore if I make calls it would be on the work phone, and its hard justifying tying up the phone lines when I probably should be working (much easier to blog and appear to be working on actual work
I don’t know what other bloggers work situations are, but I think that is a general difference between bloggers and journalists. Journalists (and I include Kleinheider in that lot) are encouraged by their employers to follow stories and call sources…whereas some bloggers have to hide it to an extent.
I would say that I get somewhat annoyed that most political candidates won’t answer a question via email. I personally don’t understand why someone wouldn’t want to type out a response without having to worry about being misquoted (or perhaps that is the reason, so they can claim a misquotation if they don’t like what the said?).
[...] Coverstone reacts to a rebuttal of his blogging by City Paper editor Clint Brewer: Print journalists have hard jobs, and I respect their efforts to do them as well as they can. Why [...]
In fact, most of you wouldn’t have anything to blog about if the newspapers didn’t publish.
Oh, but we do. Unfortunately, it’s the kind of thing you deem “unprofitworthy”.
See, to you our writing about our cats and our flowers on the windowsill and our religion and our political leanings and our…etc. is just a bunch of tired crap that doesn’t mean anything. For something which doesn’t have a future, I’ve been doing fine with it for a good 2.something years now.
I suppose we differ on what “a future” means.
I happen to think that engaging readers–even a handful–with something I’ve written is meaningful. I suppose you would feel it lacks meaning if it lacks money. That’s your choice, of course.
For some strange reason – which I have not witnessed in other markets in my travels – there is this ongoing sense of vitriol by some bloggers in Nashville directed toward this city’s newspapers. Brittney, you typically lead the charge.
Many of the (other) bloggers with this seeming grudge against the newspapers ARE trained journalists who just seem frustrated by the fact that they see something they once loved lagging behind the revolution. I get the feeling often that this is a large part of Brittney’s issue on the matter. She has a journalism degree and has had to put up with a lot of snide dismissal from the print media. Other bloggers I know of are former employees of the Scene or the Tennessean OR they work in some form of publishing. (This IS a huge publishing town, remember.)
Me, personally, my gripe against the Scene begins and ends with their continued elitism, which strikes me as odd coming from an “alternative” paper.
My overriding point on this thread, which, by the way, is an enormous time suck, is that, though we’re fallible, newspapers and journalists do commendable work.
You know you could just say THAT, and all would be well.
Instead–again with the elitism–you say “we do our jobs better than these other folks ever could.”
Those are two entirely different statements.
Clint,
There is lots of talk locally about a new media revolution and blogs taking over and newspapers being on the way out.
I don’t think this is true. Blogs will never take over the media, because as you pointed out, most journalists these days already have blogs. What makes many bloggers upset is the condescending attitude that people in the news industry like Liz display towards bloggers on a regular basis. I am sure Liz works very hard, as most journalists do. But that doesn’t mean that she has earned some sort of holier-than-thou status in the world of media. And to make the statement that “most bloggers wouldn’t last an hour under the journalistic quality control that a newspaper demands” is a perfect example of the condescending elitist attitude that bothers people so much.
I look at people like Michael Totten (www.michaeltotten.com) who are bloggers that go out and report the news. He happens to do it in Iraq, and readers pay him to do it. I have a hard time believing that he would have any trouble with the “journalistic quality control that a newspaper demands”. Are you telling me that a law professor like Glen Reynolds would also fall short of this high standard?
This is the point I’m making. Liz needs to read more blogs if she truly believes that “Most bloggers wouldn’t last an hour under the journalistic quality control that a newspaper demands.”, because she’s wrong. They can and do meet this standard on a regular basis, and some could argue do a better jon than those thumbing their noses from the ivory towers.
[...] 6th, 2007 by Katherine Coble It all started innocently enough, I suppose. But this whole Liz Garrigan deigns to address the bloggers thing is starting to bother me a little [...]
*The only blogger who has ever actually picked up a telephone and asked me a question is A.C.*
How quickly the editors forget. I called you when you were in Florida in regards to the taking down of comments at The City Paper. When we sat on a panel together you commended me for doing that very thing.
*To fabricate means to invent. We did no such thing. Someone told us something false, and we made an honest mistake by printing it as our calls to verify were out. We took responsibility for it. There are no parallels to Jayson Blair, who sat in his apartment and engaged in creative writing.*
I never once said that you invented the falsehoods. Only that you printed the hearsay as fact. Thorough reading would not have resulted in this confusion.
As for the rest, Liz’s right. This is total time suckage. But I will end my discussion by saying that The Scene and the City Paper both have their strong suits and their flaws. I point out both. I link to articles I think are good at the Scene, and I call out the crap. I’m not a certified media critic, but I am a media junkie with a journalism degree, so I think my opinions have some validity. I’m not trying to tear anyone down, and I don’t think blogs have ever had the capability of shutting down fine newspapers. But, there is more than a hint of “we can dish it out, but can’t take it” from some newspaper folks that really makes my skin crawl. The Scene is known for snark and sarcasm. It was one of the reasons I was thrilled to be able to write for them when I first graduated from college. But, as soon as any of that snark is turned back on them they become humorless and broadly insulting.
I don’t blog to make friends, and I don’t think the Scene or the City Paper should get to shovel out snark (see every page of the Scene and Rex Noseworthy at CP) but take swats at bloggers who do the same.
P.S. How funny is it that this discussion is taking place on a blog?! Writing a post on one–media funded or not–is all it takes to make one a blogger. Liz and Clint, you are bloggers. Seriously, you are.
(Okay, for real this time, I’m out.)
Aw, shucks. There’s nothing worse than finding out that the object of your weekly internet crush has no idea who you are.
I guess it’s probably too late to add anything useful to this discussion, but I just want to say that bloggers aren’t journalists, by and large. Bloggers are writers. Some are better than others, but what they/we bring to the scene is not some kind of unpaid half-assed journalism, but enthusiastic writing about things that catch our attention for good or for bad. I can’t believe the market for that will ever dry up.
On top of that, I would think that having a pool of opinionated readers who share those opinions might be useful, especially if you can figure out how to tap that resource (hee, tap that, hee), especially as it pertains to folks like Braisted.
I think that’s what worries and bothers me, not the antagonism–shoot, I kind of find that fun and amusing–but that, out of all this rough, you folks have failed to pick out the few diamonds and figure out how to make them work for you.
I mean, look, you can even name them–Braisted, Kleinheider, etc.–but I don’t see what you’re doing to make use of that talent.
That’s what I don’t get. How can you recognize talent and skill at the same time you dismiss where it is you found that talent and skill? And, how are you letting that talent and skill sit out there unexploited?
Tman said: “I look at people like Michael Totten (www.michaeltotten.com) who are bloggers that go out and report the news. He happens to do it in Iraq, and readers pay him to do it. I have a hard time believing that he would have any trouble with the “journalistic quality control that a newspaper demands”. Are you telling me that a law professor like Glen Reynolds would also fall short of this high standard?”
I would have to argue Michael Totten and Glen Reynolds are far from what Liz addressed – “most bloggers.” If the local blogosphere in general begins doing that level of work it would be treated accordingly by her and others. Some do aspire to that, and they have been named here already. As for the pace of a daily newspaper, I have known some trained, educated journalists who couldn’t really keep up. It is not for everyone.
As for Brittney, I stand corrected. Out of the dozens of times you skewered my editorials and our reporting on NiT without much explanation, you did in fact call me once. When you did call me, the reporting was in fact fair.
And Ms. Coble, journalism is a capitalistic enterprise. Your writing does not lack merit if it doesn’t make money. But when I hear bloggers who do not regularly attempt to produce work as journalists get angry because politicians or whoever won’t call them back it rings a little hollow. If you want to play, get in the game.
I think after coming to the end of answering these various comments it brings me to a point. Some bloggers in this town – not all, but some – have developed a real chip on their collective shoulder about newspapers and the “MSM.” If these same Nashville bloggers would look around the media landscape of the entire country they would realize the so-called MSM and bloggers are largely on the same side when it comes to what should be the real focus of our reporting – the government and matters of FOI and a federal Shield Law. Check out the Josh Wolf case for a starting point. Our beefs with the government and the legal jeopardy we put ourselves in to report are basically the same.
Second, there is this notion that “anyone” can be a journalist. Well, certainly everyone with some measure of intellect can create/commit an act of journalism. Yet, dedicating one’s self to earning a living that way and serving the public day in and day out for little pay and great scrutiny and criticism is an entirely different matter.
Finally, Liz is right. Try actually contributing to the process a little rather than just sitting back and taking pot shots. Some like the aforementioned Brainstem, Hobbs, Mancini and A.C. do it regularly. Others who are far more critical do not.
It would also help to be correct when asserting a fact about our work in the MSM. The MSM is called on the carpet constantly in this town for allegedly getting things wrong. Try finding a Nashville blogger that regularly corrects their mistakes – or will even admit when they have made one.
All I am saying is hold yourselves to the same standards you hold us to if you are going to maintain that “citizen” journalism in Nashville is of the same merrit as “professional” journalism. That was my entire point to Alan Coverstone.
*All I am saying is hold yourselves to the same standards you hold us to if you are going to maintain that “citizen” journalism in Nashville is of the same merrit as “professional” journalism.*
You’d never hear anything like that from me. What bloggers do is totally different. This is the problem with lumping us all in together.
*Try actually contributing to the process a little rather than just sitting back and taking pot shots. Some like the aforementioned Brainstem, Hobbs, Mancini and A.C. do it regularly. Others who are far more critical do not.*
This is highly presumptuous. How can you know what Nashville bloggers do or do not contribute? Sure, those writers you name often publicize their real-life contributions. Most do not.
*Try finding a Nashville blogger that regularly corrects their mistakes – or will even admit when they have made one.*
This argument is just plain bizarre. Bloggers regularly make corrections and admit mistakes with noted updates and retractions, and they do it with more speed (and humility) than corporate media is capable of.
Also, I regularly corrected my work at NiT, and was always quick to admit errors. Same goes for Kleinheider. And Hobbs. And Aunt B. And Glen Dean. And I could go on and on and on. This line of criticism isn’t based in reality–sadly, neither are many of the other criticisms.
Frankly, I’d love to kissy and make-up with the editors I seem to have pissed off over time, mostly because I might one day need the work! But also because I hate the animosity. But, since taking on the role of professional blogger at Channel 2 I have gotten nothing but looks down long noses and elitist attitude, especially from the kids down on 8th Ave. I don’t take kindly to that for too long.
Hey, maybe we could meet for coffee?
I thought you were “out” of the conversation, Brittney. You also said you hate the animosity with the editors in town. Nice allusion though to S-Town Mike’s selective interpretation of reality. Coffee. Cute. I’ll tell you what I told him, which is what I tell every reader. It’s a newspaper. Our coffee machines run 24/7 and my door is always open.
I guess I should go ahead and talk about all the times I’ve picked up the phone for various blog entries I’ve done.
Unfortunately, the biggest deal and the one I spent a lot of time researching and on the phone with various branches of the government is something I can no longer write about.
Of course, I did also make a difference with that story.
A difference, but no money.
—
Other stories I’ve written about AND used the phone for include the one about the Providence Theatre in Mt. Juliet, the Planned Parenthood refuge on the South Dakota Indian Reservation and the change in tax deduction status for in-kind charitable donations to Goodwill and other outlets.
It may not seem like a lot to you, but I DO call, when my story warrants it.
“Selective interpretation of reality”?
Brittney, here is Clint’s reply to me in its reality one month after I told him I would be happy to meet him for coffee last year:
“You want to get some coffee next week sometime? Or, you can come see our offices if that interests you in any way. I am open to whatever. We do have decent coffee.”
Just for the sake of his full disclosure.
How was I ever being selective, other than I posted the original invitation on Enclave without the second belated invitation to the office a month later? That’s “selective” in the broadest sense.
I thought asking him to have coffee was wryest of moves on your part, Brittney. Well played.
Mike,
You should stick to writing about clogged culverts and Metro paving projects in your neighborhood. You do it well. What you are doing here is kind of childish. Get a grip. It sometimes takes folks in the working world days and even weeks to schedule a meeting. Life is busy. Sorry if you got your feelings hurt. But, as you finally disclosed, I did follow-up. That was not your original version of events. Does that mean you will be correcting your previous entries? Brittney, corrections are common, right? It seems we have an error of omission.
Seriously, Brittney, the door is always open as it would be to anyone.
Here’s full disclosure of exactly what I posted on Enclave that you call error:
“After accepting his invitation for coffee in my next-day reply, I didn’t hear back from him for an entire month, so I figured that he wasn’t so serious about meeting (and girls, you know what a virtual purgatory it is sitting around waiting for that special guy to call back after asking you out).”
Where is the need for correction? Satement of not hearing back from you for an entire month is all there in black and white as it has been since July 8.
I’ll say it as I have elsewhere: has “knowing your subject” stopped being a prerequisite for journalism courses? Admit you don’t read Enclave all you like, but I would suggest that your failure to read it is the reason you missed that I did write that a month lapsed before I heard back from you.
Here’s a correction for you:
That should be “since July 26.”
[...] at Nashville Was Talking, comes this: ?Most bloggers wouldn?t last an hour under the journalistic quality control that a newspaper [...]
[...] of Shame In light of the most recent tempest in a teapot concerning bloggers vs. reporters, this relevant video demonstrates how a rapid succession of [...]
This is the part that bewilders me. I’m not sure if this will come as a surprise to you, Mr. Brewer, but most of us make no pretense of being citizen journalists.
Of those that are making the effort, some of whom you’ve cited (“Kleinheider, Hobbs, S-Town Mike, Mancini, Brainstem [sic] and others do some actual, honest to goodness reporting”), you and Ms. Garrigan are nonetheless regularly dismissive.
On the contrary, most of us couldn’t be less affected by what you do or do not publish. That’s what makes your apparent hostility seem so bizarre.
See what I mean? It just seems weird.
Allow me to address one more point:
With all due respect, sir, as a longtime web content professional, I disagree. Further, as a reader of your user-unfriendly online paper, I find it hard to take your prediction seriously.
Look, I am not a full time journalist, so I don’t have time to fight some battle. I obviously don’t understand what has gotten you so upset, but I would be happy to take you to lunch sometime (my treat) to discuss it and see if I can understand. Might be fun to invite Liz and Sean as well.
Either way, I think we are in this thing together. We need to set some standards for measuring our public officials, and we need to ask tough questions.
So, the second comment here is ridiculous. If you hadn’t spent as much time horse racing, more time would have been available to report on issues. You do a pretty good job of reporting on issues generally.
Stop picking on me, and start asking how each of the remaining candidates plans to solve the NCLB problem in metro schools. Spend time asking how the looming budget crisis in the city will be handled differently under a Dean as opposed to Clement administration.
You have the capability to do these investigations. I do not, but it is not the role of this blog to do that. It is the role of this blog to press anyone listening to ask the questions citizens need answered.
And Ms. Coble, journalism is a capitalistic enterprise.
I bet the City Paper’s P&L tells a different story.
I would like all of the bloggers on this thread to take a moment and look back to the original post that got this thread of comments going.
I called one of your own out on what I believe was an outright misrepresentation of my work. I followed all of the rules – I gave links, I cited sources and I gave examples. I am blogging in correct form, and there was no ambiguity about either the nature of my original commentary or the nature of my complaint. It is all in writing on this blog.
The source of the original post was calling out Alan Coverstone on taking specific, linked references I made to three different media sources in town – print, broadcast and his blog – and casting those references in a light that painted my commentary as if it were ALL about blogs – a way, perhaps, to perpetuate the old blogger vs. newspaper stereotype. The title of this blog entry – Coverstone’s Blogger Double Standard. It appears that in Coverstone’s world – and unfortunately maybe in some of yours – newspapers are suppose to be truthful, accurate and fair but bloggers do not have to be.
That was the entire point of the original post. It has yet to be addressed by Coverstone directly either on his own blog or here in his latest comments. He does recognize the tempest my post above calling him out has caused BUT HE DOES NOT deal with the charge I have made, that he misrepresented my work.
From Mr. Coverstone’s latest comment on this thread: “I obviously don’t understand what has gotten you so upset, but I would be happy to take you to lunch sometime (my treat) to discuss it and see if I can understand.”
Lunch is not needed here, Alan, I simply want you to address what I believe is a misrepresentation by you of my writing. That has been the only point from the very beginning. Not newspapers vs. bloggers, or Briley vs. Dean. And I am not “picking on you.” You entered this fray willingly. As Brittney said earlier, I am now a blogger just like the rest of you. I want you to either admit you misrepresented my work or deny it and say that you will not correct it. You are avoiding the issue.
I get calls in my newsroom every single day from regular citizens challenging our reporting in some form or fashion. It is part of the job. Sometimes they are right, sometimes they are wrong. But, I talk to all of them or I make sure an editor talks to them. You are not giving me that courtesy, Alan, you are avoiding my complaint.
I would like to hear from some of the longtime, respected bloggers on this thread. You have offered a lot of commentary about Liz’s comments but not about the actual issue at hand. Did Mr. Coverstone misrepresent my words? All of the links and source material are provided. I think this would make a nice case study for the ethics of the Nashville blogosphere. Is accuracy important in blogging?
Let me speak now to some of the other comments left here.
S-Town: Thank you for the correction. My comment about your talents covering clogged culverts was not an insult, it was a compliment. Clogged culverts and other issues like that are important to folks. I admire your ability to report, when I have read your blog. I have had reporters at other newspapers who did not understand matters of municipal planning as well as you do.
I confess, I don’t read you regularly because I think you have a pre-determined view of what the City Paper does and why we do it. You have pigeonholed our politics in the past, even when we have taken editorial positions that run very contrary to the stereotype you have given us. I stopped reading because I find it difficult to believe we offer the community nothing of value in our reporting 252 publishing days a year. But that is the picture you paint of our efforts.
Brittney: I can only speak to my personal experiences with Nashville Bloggers. I have asked for corrections privately to them in email and in some cases have never even gotten the courtesy of a reply. In some cases they have taken that private communication and ridiculed it on their blogs. This blog entry is the first time I have publicly called out a blogger who I feel has misrepresented our writing. Look what is happening – a blogosphere gang tackle but NO ONE is speaking to my original complaint.
Ms. Coble: When I spoke about bloggers picking up the phone and asking questions I meant when our newspaper was the subject of their coverage. In all the blog entries about our newspaper, only Brittney and AC have ever called me. I am sure you have called folks on other topics plenty of times.
KateO’: The entire context of this blog entry and the thread of comments was about bloggers who do attempt to practice citizen journalism. There is no implication here that blogs about more social topics have no value. As for our web presence, I am sorry if you don’t like it. The rest of the city appears to since our web traffic is at an all time high. I am pretty comfortable where we are and with the software we are using. It is used all over the world by some of the largest, most successful media companies on the planet. It also appears to be working for us.
Sarcastro: Cute, but not really on topic.
The Nashville Scene constantly engages in sloppy, haphazard, sophomoric journalism. Journalism that sometimes takes the threat of a lawsuit before they will print a cloaked retraction in their Love/Hate mail section.
http://www.votejimboyd.com/lawsuit.htm
It must be nice to have enough money to buy and mash enough wood pulp to irresponsibly print slanders, libels and fabrications without consequence.
______________________
William James (Jim) Boyd
http://www.votejimboyd.com
[...] has a wonderful roundup of quotable quotes from a little discussion had yesterday between the editors of two of our major newspapers and bloggers on the subject of [...]
Listen to that. The silence is deafening.
Not one taker on my question about the ethics of Coverstone’s blog entry that caused this whole brouhaha. Not one. We’ve talked about the City Paper, the Scene, Liz, me, bloggers vs. newspapers but not the blogger in question and the subject of this whole post in the first place.
Does this mean Nashville bloggers police the MSM but not their own when it comes to matters of ethics and accuracy?
Or, does it mean the Nashville blogger clique won’t tolerate anyone dissenting from the party line?
I’ve tried three times to comment, but my comments must be ending up in the spam trap.
We don’t have a spam trap.
Sorry, what I am trying to say is we don’t have one that would keep you from commenting as you have already done so several times. The spam trap catches automated crawlers looking to post, not individuals. If you are having trouble posting it would be for another reason. But, you seem to be transmitting fine now.
Your comments policy says you do:
“We do use an automatic spam filter and a dirty-words scrubber to screen out foul language. Comments with more than three hyperlinks may be automatically rejected as spam.”
Is that inaccurate?
I’ll try breaking my comment into pieces and see if it gets through.
I’ll grant you that you the context of the entry appears to have been limited to bloggers who “attempt to” practice citizen journalism. (Cute meta-dismissal.) But your recent non-journalism-related snark at S-townMike in this space as well as Liz Garrigan’s ongoing insults towards bloggers in general suggest that the hostility is broader. As do your own sentiments in this comment, which I quote again:
If you wish the commenters on this thread to limit the scope of their criticisms to journalistic blogging, perhaps you should model that behavior yourself.
Permit me to repurpose a quote from Ms. Garrigan:
Are you not the least bit curious about the specifics of the complaints from readers of your online publication? I realize you stand by your site traffic, but an increase in site traffic in the short term is a poor metric for gauging user satisfaction. Do you feel no sense of obligation to listen to your audience on matters of user experience and site improvement? I find that disappointing. Surely this illustrious software is configurable. Surely there are options for presenting the site’s content in a manner consistent with user expectations and standards of online interaction. It’s not as if I’m the only one who has expressed dissatisfaction.
(I’ve omitted the linked references this time, but there are plenty out there.)
I’ll take them one at a time, Kate O’.
The S-Town Mike reference I blogged about that you speak of was to a debate about the mayoral race taking place on the Scene’s blog. It began as a series of comments on a Karl Dean event. I did not see that as off topic for Political Animals, nor did I realize I am forbidden to betray any kind of sense of humor while blogging as a journalist. Being an editor does not mean one doesn’t find things funny every now and then. S-Town Mike has thrown out more than his fair share of personal barbs my way, 99.9% of which I have never responded to. I don’t see why one thrown back and relevant to the mayoral race blows my premise or really should make you think less of me. People do it to me all the time. Why doesn’t that bother you as well? Do I not count?
As for any more complaints about our website, I am happy to hear them from you. But that is a little off topic for this blog entry. Actually, the original topic of this blog entry has yet to be addressed by ANY of the dozen or so bloggers commenting here. You can send your complaints about our web format directly to me at cbrewer@nashvillecitypaper.com. I, of course, welcome your input and will be happy to dialogue with you about it in that setting.
Again, no feedback from you or anyone about the original topic I raised. Why is that?
Clint, as I said over at Kleinheider’s, for my part, I assumed you were right.
Again, no feedback from you or anyone about the original topic I raised. Why is that?
The original topic bores me.
Clint,
Does this mean Nashville bloggers police the MSM but not their own when it comes to matters of ethics and accuracy?
Good lord you appear to know next to nothing about the blogosphere. Bloggers eat their own on a regular basis, far more than any print media does. Ask Brittney about “bloggers policing their own”, she has a tale to tell about it. Suffice to say that yes, Nashville bloggers call each other out all the time. That statement is simply staggering in ignorance.
Or, does it mean the Nashville blogger clique won’t tolerate anyone dissenting from the party line?
Again, the Nashville blogger “community” is not some single entity with a prioritized leadership structure. There is no “party line”. You seem to be complaining that this thread went off topic and no one addressed the subject at hand.
Welcome to the blogosphere newbie. There is no “fair” here. You do what you need to to make your point. Don’t like it? Then stay out of it.
Nashville bloggers call each other out all the time.
Yes. As a matter of fact, check out this morning’s very thread over at MCB for an example.
Ya know, I think the primary problem here is perception. “Nashville Bloggers” are more 400 strong. You simply cannot lump us all in together and expect to get anywhere in conversation.
The ethics of the Nashville blogosphere as described by Tman: “Welcome to the blogosphere newbie. There is no “fair” here. You do what you need to to make your point. Don’t like it? Then stay out of it.”
Not the moral high ground I expected from folks who try to make me and the MSM “accountable.” Is this an accurate representation of the sentiment about ethics in blogging in Nashville?
I am very familiar with bloggers calling each other out and Brittney’s situation at NiT. My question was within the context of this thread. Will they do it when it is a print journalist complaining about a blogger?
Thus far, only Aunt B. has spoken to the original premise of this blog – my complaint against Coverstone.
*The ethics of the Nashville blogosphere as described by Tman…Is this an accurate representation of the sentiment about ethics in blogging in Nashville?*
Wow. Are you really trying to attribute one man’s comments to the entire Nashville online self-publishing community? Seriously? Because that is so wrong I don’t even know how to respond. You, sir, are a strawman maker like few others.
*Thus far, only Aunt B. has spoken to the original premise of this blog – my complaint against Coverstone.*
That’s the thing about blogs, as opposed to newspaper. You don’t get to decide what the conversation is about. Not without strict moderation and/or censorship. Ever heard of the “bottom-down” approach to communicating? Well, it doesn’t work in this format.
Er, I should have said “top-down.”
Brittney said: “Wow. Are you really trying to attribute one man’s comments to the entire Nashville online self-publishing community? Seriously? Because that is so wrong I don’t even know how to respond. You, sir, are a strawman maker like few others.”
I am not making a statement, I am asking a question. That is why there was a question mark after the sentence. Is what Tman said a fair representation of blogging ethics in this market? Again, notice the question mark.
And I am not trying to control the conversation. I am simply asking the questions I am interested in seeing answered. There has been no editing of posts here or gatekeeping of responses.
I have been asking the same question for hours on the very same topic, and they remain unanswered. The lack of feedback from bloggers on this thread on the issue of Coverstone’s blog entry may end up being my answer.
Brittney,
Have you read the blog posts on this blog and Coverstone’s in question? Do you have an opinion on the blogging ethics of quoting/paraphrasing someone incorrectly? Just curious.
The ethics of the Nashville blogosphere
There you go again, grouping us all together. You’re missing the point. I never claimed to be speaking from the “moral high ground”. I had a problem with Liz unfairly maligning the blogosphere as incapable in general of handling her “serious journalistic integrity”. Maybe I should get a column at the New Republic instead, eh?
“I am very familiar with bloggers calling each other out and Brittney’s situation at NiT. “
Then why did you write this?- “Does this mean Nashville bloggers police the MSM but not their own when it comes to matters of ethics and accuracy?”
*That is why there was a question mark after the sentence. Is what Tman said a fair representation of blogging ethics in this market? Again, notice the question mark.*
Get more than 400 local bloggers on the phone for some genuine reporting, then get back to us with the answer. The nashville blogging community has no credo or set of standards or overarching motto that can be boiled down that easily. What you are trying to do is impossible–we are not members of some groupthink project. What Bill Hobbs considers ethical for himself is entirely different from any other blogger you find in the area.
You do get that there are hundreds and hundreds of us, many who have no idea that the others of us even exist, right?
I have no interest in your discussion about Coverstone’s misquoting you. I read the posts quickly, but have no opinion on them. I jumped in when Liz got all condescending in a futile attempt to try to stick up for a bunch of good people who routinely get lumped into her “lesser than” category.
The lack of feedback from bloggers on this thread on the issue of Coverstone’s blog entry may end up being my answer.
I tried to not be my usual wordy self with my initial comment, but since you didn’t consider it a valid response, I’ll give you the larger version.
I didn’t comment on the original premise because I do not have an opinion. You and Liz Garrigan both fessed up to not reading the vast majority of blogs out there. I presume that is because you are not interested in my feelings on Harry Potter or on Slartibartfast’s adoption stories, Sista’s insider look at country music or John Carney’s mission trips.
Likewise, I’m not generally captivated by the internicine drama that goes on with hyperlocal politics and the coverage thereof.
“OH, look! Joe Schmoe voted the wrong way on the bill to turn Mulberry Street into a sneetch-free zone. Polls indicated he would do otherwise. What lies behind Schmoe’s suprising turn at last night’s City Council meeting?”
That stuff does not grab my attention. Not saying that it’s bad. I’m just saying that I Do Not Care.
You and Coverstone are having a good ol’ fashioned get-out-the-ruler metaconversation about a topic that I didn’t follow.
But…
As a blogger I felt that my “name” got dragged into it. So I came over here to respond to that.
I wish that I had followed every harrowing twist and turn in your original conversations with Coverstone so that I could adjudicate in the fashion you prefer. However I did not and I cannot.
You seem to have an issue with Coverstone. You may have a valid point. But your issue is with COVERSTONE. Bloggers are not unionised. We are not Borg. I wouldn’t know Coverstone if he lay in front of me on the street covered in green and gold flames.
By extrapolating your case with Coverstone into a case with Bloggers in General you cultivated my interest and my multiple responses.
Do Bloggers fact check? Some do. Some don’t. I’m rigorous about it at my place, but Knuck will tell you his motto is “never let the truth get in the way of a good story.”
Do Bloggers hold each other to the same standard we hold Traditional Media? Some do. Some don’t. Depends on what kind of blog you’re running and what kind of conversation you want to have.
You keep saying that you don’t receive answers. Yet I keep seeing the answer plain as day.
I’ll try one more time:
Bloggers are not a homogeneous group.
Blog Conversations are grass-roots and organic.
You’re now a blogger. You called out another blogger on shoddy blogwork. Congratulations. That is how it is done, grasshopper.
So, by your own actions you have proven that bloggers do call each other on shoddy blogging.
The circle of life continues. Shantih.
Again, my question is being avoided with cute, snarky answers. I thought snarky is what you didn’t like about Liz Garrigan.
I am throwing the question out there to the bloggers on this thread participating in this conversation. But, of course, you know that. You also know I am aware that all 400 of you don’t have a group think.
I am asking any single blogger who is watching and reading this for their opinion of the Nashville blogging community’s sense of ethics when it comes to accurate regurgitation of the facts. But, of course, you know that too.
Instead, you choose to try and score points with put-downs rather than answer the question. Again, I thought that was part of your problem with Liz Garrigan’s alleged tone toward bloggers, all the insults. Yet, Brittney and Tman both re-commit the offense here. And there it is again. The Blogger Double Standard for journalists.
Clint,
I am not trying to be snarky. I’m trying to be honest.
You asked a question, and I’m giving you my personal, honest answer.
you choose to try and score points with put-downs rather than answer the question.
Perhaps we got off on the wrong foot with your snide dismissal of most bloggers as crazed, lonelyheart cat fanatics.
Thank you for your answer, Ms. Coble.
I would like to add that I did not drag the entire blogosphere into it initially. That was done by others. I was focused on Coverstone, the topic of my original post.
Ironically, my complaint with Coverstone was that he painted comments I made on another topic to make me look like I have a problem with the entire blogosphere, which I don’t. That is perhaps the greatest irony here. Thank you for your answer.
Let me ask the question in a different way. When a blogger is attempting citizen journalism, is it important that they represent people’s viewpoints accurately and quote them accurately? Again, Brittney, I am not expecting the entire chorus of 400 Nashville bloggers to sing out in one chorus answer. I am asking anyone who is listening for their individual opinion.
When a blogger is attempting citizen journalism, is it important that they represent people’s viewpoints accurately and quote them accurately?
Well of course it is.
Maybe that’s part of why you’re not getting an answer. Most of us seem to think the answer is obvious.
If we blogs have a major failing it’s that we can seem to shapeshift too much for the liking of the Traditional Media. It appears from the outside that one day someone’s a “citizen journalist” and the next he’s celebrating Caturday with the rest of them.
I think you’ll find, more often than not, however, that when a blogger is wearing his or her Journalist hat, they WILL factcheck, make corrections immediately and participate in the dialogue about their stories.
I sometimes think a bit of the antipathy we get is that you all have to be “on” all the time, whereas you perceive we are allowed to run and hide behind the “I’m Just A Blogger” rock if need be.
What I think you’d find–if you were so inclined to look–is that the bloggers who do reporting don’t want to hide behind the rocks.
From the department of not-getting-it-and-probably-never-will, Clint continues-
I am asking any single blogger who is watching and reading this for their opinion of the Nashville blogging community’s sense of ethics when it comes to accurate regurgitation of the facts.
Dude. Seriously. How many times do people have to tell you that you can’t lump the ethics of the entire Nashville blogosphere in one opinion? You also can’t say that MOST Nashville bloggers wouldn’t be able to handle the journalistic standards that the Scene employs.
Ironically, my complaint with Coverstone was that he painted comments I made on another topic to make me look like I have a problem with the entire blogosphere, which I don’t.
You have a funny way of showing it.
When a blogger is attempting citizen journalism, is it important that they represent people’s viewpoints accurately and quote them accurately?
In this SINGLE bloggers opinion, yes, it is important. You only have 399 more to go. Godspeed young man.
*I am asking any single blogger who is watching and reading this for their opinion of the Nashville blogging community’s sense of ethics*
You cannot and will not ever know the Nashville blogging community’s sense of ethics, as it is impossible to determine. Anyone who gave your their opinion on something that cannot be its very nature be determined is wasting their time and yours.
Damn, lemme try over on that last sentence:
Anyone who gave you their opinion on something that cannot BY its very nature be determined is wasting their time and yours
That’s all I was looking for Tman – answers from individuals on their own opinion. I am not sure why that is so hard for you to grasp. But, thanks for finally answering a question.
Liz said you guys wouldn’t do well in newsrooms. Some of you – not ALL, but SOME, just SOME – might not do well behind a podium answering questions from reporters either. SOME of you seem to enjoy avoiding them.
Clint, what is your opinion on the ethics of Nashville 5th graders?
I am not trying to be a smartass, but that is not something you can form an opinion on, is it? This is what you are getting so hot over: no one will give your their opinion on something they HAVE NOT FORMED AN OPINION ON.
If you don’t get that, or can’t at least admit to yourself that you get that, then you are not bright enough to be in the position you are in. Harsh, but true. You are either ignorant here, or being willfully ignorant. Either way, not good.
Ms. Coble, thank you for that very thoughtful answer. I appreciate it. I was asking the question because to many readers of blogs I think it is not obvious where that line is in terms of bloggers being truthful. So, I think it helps for frequent bloggers to share their individual opinions about what they think is important with ethical blogging. I had an issue where I did not feel a blogger had represented my work fairly, so I tried to turn a negative into a positive and start a conversation. Again, I appreciate your answer.
And, Brittney, if you are just going to sit back there and rag on the premise of the conversation then why are you still here lurking here and throwing bombs? Can’t you go back to Sparkwood and make fun of me? Heck, I was nice. Even invited you to my office to talk earlier. If you think this is so worthless then just move on.
You cannot admit that you are asking for an opinion from people who cannot–by the very nature of blogs and blogging–form such an opinion. You will not admit that you have asked us to do the impossible, instead whining when we don’t come through for you.
Just another instance of dishing it out, but being utterly unable to take it. If you wanted substantive conversation about this stuff, you’d at least admit what you are asking for is not possible. Any answer given would be insufficient. But, you know that, I’m fairly certain.
I don’t think this conversation is worthless. I think it is very enlightening. It has illustrated much about many things I was in the dark about before.
WHY ARE YOU NOT ANSWERING MY QUESTION ABOUT NASHVILLE’S 5TH GRADERS? THAT IS ALL I’M ASKING FOR HERE!
Let’s see, Brittney, so far I have Aunt B. Ms. Coble and Tman who have an opinion.
So let me get this straight.
You – who use to work full-time at a network television station – do not have any opinion at all of any kind on whether a blogger acting as a citizen journalist has a responsibility or an ethical imperative to accurately represent others opinions and accurately quote information?
As for you being a smartass or not, you sound and awful lot like a much less clever version of Liz Garrigan today. I have known Liz Garrigan since 1996, and I can assure you she is a HUGE smartass.
Brittney, for all your platitudes about civility and not having people (journalists) look down their noses at you, you seem pretty accomplished at that yourself.
I remembering something about glass houses.
Again, if you don’t like it here just go home.
Fifth graders do not seem to have much of a sense of ethics as they still are largely developing their sense of right and wrong as they are minor children between the ages of 9 and 10.
Ethics is a more evolved application of that sense of right and wrong, typically applied in professional settings or within adult group dynamics.
Does that help?
(Shew, Brittney, Shew! Go on now, go home.)
*do not have any opinion at all of any kind on whether a blogger acting as a citizen journalist has a responsibility or an ethical imperative to accurately represent others opinions and accurately quote information?*
That is not what you asked. You asked for my opinion on “the Nashville blogging community’s sense of ethics when it comes to accurate regurgitation of the facts.” Surely you can see how those things are different! I have been arguing this with you for four or more comments, and you don’t (or cannot) get it. Try to keep up. You are aces at re-framing the argument and creating strawmen for you to bat around. Now, had you asked this question initially more people may have provided an answer. You did not.
*I have known Liz Garrigan since 1996, and I can assure you she is a HUGE smartass.*
Well, knock me down with a feather. As if that isn’t screamingly obvious.
*Again, if you don’t like it here just go home*
I like it here fine. Like I said, highly entertaining and highly enlightening. Sounds to me like you’d prefer it if I exit, though.
Oh,Brittney, I think I am taking it pretty well. Still hanging with you here. Nothing else?
So, someone use to actually pay you, Brittney, to do this all day? Remarkable. America is a terrific country.
Ain’t it though?
Clint,
That’s all I was looking for Tman – answers from individuals on their own opinion.
No you weren’t. You repeatedly asked if the “Nashville blogosphere does this or that”, and what Brittney and I and most others on this thread have been trying to tell you is that YOU CANNOT ANSWER THIS QUESTION BECAUSE THE NASHVILLE BLOGGING COMMUNITY IS NOT A SINGLE ENTITY.
You can read above for evidence of your twisting of your own words if you want. It’s starting to get pathetic.
Brittney: Heck, answer either question. I openly reframed the question in my very productive and civil conversation with Ms. Coble. (Thank you again, Ms. Coble)
I thought you, Brittney, were reading along. I think you are having a hard time keeping up. Read back through the thread for a reference point. I’ll slow down for you.
Track along, Tman. The converstion changed while you were away. I modified the question in an exchange with Ms Coble because the old one seemed to confound people. I think you already answered the question though, didn’t you?
CB: When a blogger is attempting citizen journalism, is it important that they represent people’s viewpoints accurately and quote them accurately?
TMAN: In this SINGLE bloggers opinion, yes, it is important. You only have 399 more to go. Godspeed young man.
We have your vote counted, Tman, thanks.
By the way, you folks are so agitated. I am doing great, though. This has been like a day off for me compared to the tension I usually endure as an editor. (I hope my reporters are not reading this.)
“I am doing great, though…Oh,Brittney, I think I am taking it pretty well.”
Just damn.
I modified the question in an exchange with Ms Coble because the old one seemed to confound people
Look Clint, you “modified” the question because we explained to you that there isn’t an answer to the original question. Then you do what most people do when they have no shame and have lost an argument-move the goalposts. I can read, I saw Kat’s posts.
And by the way, you’re not doing a great job of debunking the opinion that some journalists act like stuck-up condescending elitists.
I hope your reporters aren’t reading this either, guy.
And, Brittney, if you are just going to sit back there and rag on the premise of the conversation then why are you still here lurking here and throwing bombs?
In all fairness to Brittney, it did seem like the ‘premise of the conversation’ shifted forth and back a bit…
One minute we’re talking about Coverstone, the next about cats, the next about phone calls.
I think it helps for frequent bloggers to share their individual opinions about what they think is important with ethical blogging.
It does help, but I don’t think perhaps you were clear in your early posts about wanting THAT type of information. And, FWIW, as you continue to read blogs, you’ll see that many of us do share our opinions on ethical blogging, and do so with great frequency. A few of us (like Tim Warner) even have Codes of Conduct on our sites.
Dang it. One trip to McDonalds and I miss a whole bunch of stuff.
And, Tman, you are not doing a great job debunking the opinion that SOME (not ALL but SOME) bloggers are total wackadoodles.
I am not trying to debunk any opinions. I am just sitting here having a series of conversations in real time. Some of them have been pretty good. Civil, even, and informative.
I’m not sure what your deal is, though. All that hostility is unhealthy.
How is it elitist for me to sit here and talk with you nice folks all day? I’m not sure how you got from point A to point B. Is this the part again where as an editor I am not suppose to have a sense of humor? Darn, I keep forgetting that rule.
I didn’t move the goalposts, I just asked the question in a different way that seemed more in line with the group’s pre-determined assumptions about their favorite hobby, blogging. However, I don’t think it would be beyond the pale for someone to have an opinion about the majority of active bloggers in a city who address matters of public policy and practice some citizen journalism. I am sure someone out there has an opinion on the overall tone and tenor of the Nashville blogosphere on that topic. They just weren’t on this thread today.
What is the url for your blog?
Oh, wait. I found it Tman. Never mind. I’ll have a look.
Yes, the premise did shift in the conversation. It has been a two-day conversation after all. I changed the question because no one had an opinion they felt comfortable offering on the first question. I tried to narrow it down a bit. I am not sure why that is so offensive to some, I was just trying to create a productive back and forth and get some information.
Are we done? Anyone else? Ok, then. Thanks for the conversation, folks. It seemed a little strained at points, but overall very informative. For those who did so, thanks for sharing your opinions.
As I said earlier in the thread to Brittney, my door is always open. I am not sure if any of you will actually take me up on that, but it is a genuine offer.
As I said earlier in the thread to Brittney, my door is always open. I am not sure if any of you will actually take me up on that, but it is a genuine offer.
You know what else would be cool? If you came to BarCamp.
The way I see it, we could all of us come to your office one by one, which would be fun.
But…if you came to BarCamp you could get to know several of us in this segment of the city in a fun and interesting way. With beer.
Clint,
Hover your cursor over my name in the blue font, and the url magically will direct you to my page.
As I said earlier in the thread to Brittney, my door is always open. I am not sure if any of you will actually take me up on that, but it is a genuine offer.
Which one of us wackadoodles (seriously, people still use this word?) do you think will take you up? Is this how you do business with clients?
Clint:”Hello clients, I think all of you are morons. So, who wants to buy some adspace?”
Smooth man, smooth.
I am up for it, Ms. Coble. Shoot me an email with time, date, place. cbrewer@nashvillecitypaper.com
As Tman pointed out, I am a newbie to blogging and apparently not a very welcome addition in some circles. But I do indeed like beer.
Tman, is this the part again where I am not suppose to have a sense of humor?
You have insulted me all day in every comment you have left. I lob one back – a silly word to show I am joking – and you are offended? Toughen up, man.
And, yes, people still say wackadoodle. I have a colleague from Chicago who is actually younger than me and she uses it all the time.
Jesus, Clint. Just followed a link here and see that you spent *all day* carrying on a pointless conversation. Is this kind of time management why your paper sucks so bad?
Careful, gbb. Any suggestion that spending all day on a blog is pointless will really inflame some of these folks. Be careful.
Clint,
I haven’t been offended by anything you’ve said to me, so your empathy is misplaced. Don’t misconstrue ALLCAPS as me getting upset. And if you think I was insulting you “all day in every comment” I have left, then I suggest you step away from the blogosphere for a little while.
Baby steps Clint, baby steps.
Liz is talking about “journalistic standards”? Yet Jeff remains on her staff? Liz, guess what, Jeff couldn’t survive by Blog standards, nor could he survive the giggle test.
I am glad you are not offended, Tman. That was not my intention.
You will just have to excuse me today as I am a little off my game. This whole asteroid thing has me really freaked out. That #99942 Apophis scheduled for 2036 keeps me up at night.
I like original insults Clint, and that was well done.
Now if you’ll excuse me I have to go help choose wackadoodle bowties for my friend, he can’t decide what pattern looks best with a receeding hairline.
Dude, I don’t have a hairline anymore.
Stop the presses! The recession is complete!
That’s good stuff. The recession was complete sometime in the 1990s.
Ethics really boils down to one basic rule:
Be honest.
There’s no reason that can’t be a one-sized fits all ethics rule for the entire Nashville blogosphere.
[...] reminded of a recent and rather over-caffeinated assertion by Liz Garrigan, editor of the Nashville Scene, that “most bloggers wouldn’t last an [...]
[...] the dustup at the City Paper Corrall the other day, I decided to look in on Coverstone. I like his blog. I want to read it more often, [...]
Mr. Brewer, I’m going to be frank. Your focus in here has never seemed about ethics to me. You seem more like a man trying to form a posse or lynch mob to go and string up Mr. Coverstone.
That said, Ms Garrigan derailed you from the beginning. She owes you a comment thread since she stole yours.
Ah crap. Gotta look at those dates better. I hate it when I’m the last one.
Dear Dubya,
I am sorry you feel that way. My only goal, initially, was simply to point out that Mr. Coverstone was not – and still is not – practicing what he preaches.
Citizens, bloggers or not, can and should hold the press accountable for our shortcomings and mistakes. We are humans, after all, and we are going to make mistakes. And you are, after all, the customers.
When a blogger assumes the role of a citizen journalist as I would argue Coverstone has then it is my belief the blogger in question should have to publish by the same rules & ethics they want “us” – the mainstream media – to follow. Those rules essentially are to tell the truth and admit one’s mistakes.
Coverstone still refuses to admit his mistake or offer me a correction. He took my words and essentially said they were white when they were black. It is not real hard to discern or follow if one reads my original post and his follow-up which casts it in a very false light.
Here are the two statements that sum up my argument on this thread: Professional journalists should publish truthfull, accurate reporting. Bloggers acting as citizen journalists should do the same.
It all boils down to the assertion that bloggers who throw stones should not live in glass houses. Spending countless words and web pages breaking down the merits and shortcomings of a full-time journalist rings pretty hollow if you yourself cannot even admit and correct an obvious mistake on you blog.
I don’t need or want a lynch mob for Mr. Coverstone. I actually don’t know Mr. Coverstone. The point of my blog post was firstly to correct his error about my writing.
Secondly, I wanted to see what other local bloggers would have to say. I simply wanted to see if other bloggers would so adamantly defend a member of the mainstream media wronged by a blogger as they would a blogger wronged by the MSM. I think based on the above thread I largely got my answer.
[...] some thought and reflection, Alan Coverstone has some further thoughts on the dustup betwix himself and City Paper editor Clint Brewer that morphed into a wider conflict between local mainstream newspapermen and women and the local [...]
[...] elements of the Nashville political blogosphere have been embroiled in one of those MSM v Bloggers dustups that emerges from time to time. As in most such imbroglios, there is an [...]
I gave up on trying to figure out and follow this conflict and, actually, I stopped reading before getting very far into the above. My initial take, not that anyone gives a flip, is that Clint was not singling out Coverstone in his (Clint’s) “nabobs” comment or making an exclusionary blanket statement about bloggers.
But all this serves to bolster my recent resolve to spend less time in blogdom. I have wasted too much time here.
It’s been real.
[...] that that Liz & Co. say about the difference between bloggers and journalists? That journalists always pick up the [...]
[...] Abramson addresses the “battle” between Nashville local media and the Nashville local blogosphere in his first post back at Pith in the Wind. Who’s side [...]
[...] Is it that the mainstream media in Nashville doesn’t “get blogging” or is it they get it all too well knowing full well that a good blog feud can lead to long comment threads and traffic? [...]
Amen, Brother A.C.
[...] there have been rumblings in the local blogosphere about this, and a recent Pew Research study determined that our disdain for the media [...]
Hello, I agree and would further point out that when apartment nashville pet tn Monday is factored in, it\’s a slam dunk!!!
Them as has, gets.
—————————————————————————————————-
http://derrickdownszt.easyjournal.com