Please don't read this as coming from a place that is dismissive of the work the blogosphere DOES do in holding mainstream media outlets accountable. It's also not to discount the grunt work that bloggers, diarists, etc. do every day in order to broaden and deepen political discourse.
Instead, consider it a word of caution. An admonition against becoming what we were meant to hold accountable.
One of the primary functions the blogosphere self-ascribes is “media critic.” Look around the internet, and you’ll find no shortage of blogs that devote their time and energy to little else, and the refrain is a familiar one: the traditional/mainstream/lamestream media is whack! Only enterprising bloggers, free from the corporate interests that the big boys are beholden to, can truly get down to what’s important, can truly impact the zeitgeist in a positive way. Why, that’s why newspapers and magazines are failing, you know!
Now, I’m not fully aware of the true size and scope and interconnectivity of the blogosphere (as evidenced not only by my readership, but also by my use of words such as “whack” and “zeitgeist.”) But upon reading a post from Nate Silver on the 2012 Republican candidates and media coverage, I’m starting to wonder if we have it all backwards:
Which Republican presidential candidates are getting the most attention, favorable or otherwise, from the media these days?
Actually, it depends a great deal on just which type of media you’re reading.
In traditional media outlets like The New York Times, these five candidates are receiving the most coverage: Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, Haley Barbour and Tim Pawlenty.
The list looks quite different, however, if instead you’re reading about the nascent campaign in the blogosphere.
Ms. Palin has a much more dominant presence there, receiving about 30 percent of the overall coverage on blogs — more than three times as much as any other candidate. Mr. Gingrich also receives a fair amount of blogosphere attention, ranking fourth overall, but his share on blogs is smaller than in the traditional media.
Meanwhile, rather than Mr. Romney, Mr. Barbour and Mr. Pawlenty, the top five in the blogosphere has Ms. Palin and Mr. Gingrich accompanied by three somewhat more controversial candidates: Donald Trump, Ron Paul and Michele Bachmann.
Now, far be it from me, as a Democrat, to judge the relative merits of the Republican field. Barring an unforeseen circumstance, I’ll never be marking a ballot for any of them. But I think I’m within my rights to consider the batch of candidates being focused on by the traditional media as a bit more “serious” than the ones the blogosphere seems to be concerned with.
See, as a defacto member of the blogosphere, it’s easy to get caught up in it. When spending time unplugged from the constant bombardment of political information that’s available these days, I find the “real world” surprisingly devoid of politics. There aren’t Tea Party demonstrations on every street corner, folks aren’t talking about the intricacies of health care reform in the checkout line at the supermarket, and I’d be willing to bet a stranger picked at random probably still couldn’t find Libya on a map.
Point being: are we sure that access to this “new media” is a new positive? I think it’s worth asking.
So the next time you read a post on your favorite blog (even if it’s this one) lamenting the sorry state of political news in this country, keep this in mind. Before we start removing splinters from Chuck Todd’s eye, maybe we should worry about the plank in Arianna’s.