AT&T Tech Support 360
- Related Stories
-
Tech meets art meets music at SXSW
March 19, 2007 -
Dan Rather: Journalism has 'lost its guts'
March 12, 2007 -
Season's over, so Cuban cheers for HD
September 5, 2006
The longtime news anchor had his career prematurely shortened after bloggers drew attention to an erroneous document used by CBS as the basis of a report on President Bush's National Guard service. CBS later disavowed the report, and Rather, who issued an on-air apology, was soon out the door.
But Rather has revived his career working with Internet entrepreneur Marc Cuban's HDNet. In a one-on-one with CNET News.com at the South by Southwest multimedia festival here, this born-again cyberjournalist offered his views on how journalism is evolving in the digital era and the challenges he thinks the profession will face.
Q: Did you see blogging as a serious journalistic endeavor before the CBS dustup over President Bush's military record?
Rather: Some parts of it I did. As I've said many times, I think it's very easy to generalize about blogging, which is a big sphere, and growing bigger every day. But there were parts of it I considered to be serious. Anybody who blogs, who does real reporting, which is to say, make telephone calls, go interview people, go talk to people, in a spirit of independence...and (tries) to do journalism with integrity, I would consider a journalist.
Of course there are an increasing number of bloggers now who by any definition are reporters, or journalists. There are some others who in my opinion would fit into a gray area. They may do good reporting, but they mix in their own opinion, their own point of view, without clearly signifying the difference. Now that's not a kind of journalism that I practice. It's not one that I'm going to damn either.
We're talking about definition. In the first category, they're clearly reporters; the second category is gray. And there are some, as there are in TV and radio and newspapers, who claim to be journalists, who aren't by any reasonable definition doing that--for example, someone who's blogging as a political operative for a party, with a partisan point of view, and who doesn't clearly hang out their shingle. But it's a complicated picture. The point is it's grown exponentially over the years, and there are more in each of these categories.
How can newspapers adapt to new technology and business models?
Rather: I think there is a way. I think newspapers are struggling to find that way, and some have had more success than others. As we sit here today, some will survive as newspapers, which is to say they'll use newsprint, and they'll come out daily. I certainly can see the time when most, if not all, newspapers reach the point at which they say, "We're going to do the newspaper, but it's only going to be on the Internet, or on supplementary new technologies," like going to mobile telephones and that kind of thing--basically not doing it on newsprint.
Wanted: The best of SXSW
I would guess that this would probably start with a newspaper that's in a clearly, heavily permeated high-technology community. I can see the day where a paper such as that says we're going to get out of the newsprint business. I think it's going to begin that way. But it all depends on whether and how quickly advertisers take to it.
What role can the Internet play in neutralizing the effect of media consolidation?
Rather: I think it can play a very important role. First of all, in holding people accountable. Sometimes in the guise of holding people accountable, some want to smear others' reputations. But I do believe that at least the potential for self-correction is already there on the Internet for those kinds of things. At its best, journalism on the Internet--including blogging--does some of the following, holds people to accountability. It says, "Wait a minute, this is what the governor says, or the mayor says, or the president says. But here are the facts, and by any reasonable analysis, this is the truth." It's speaking truth to power, but it's become almost a cliche, because it's a powerful thought, and it's an essential for journalism in a society such as ours, a constitutional democracy based on the principles of freedom and democracy, that you have a high degree of accountability, that you have a constant questioning of power.
I believe that news is that which people need to know, that someone somewhere doesn't want them to know. And all the rest is just advertising. Now insofar as the Internet can operate from that baseline and help inform citizens, I think its potential is unlimited. It's one of the things that excites me about the Internet.
See more CNET content tagged:
Dan Rather,
journalism,
newspaper,
blogging,
journalist
attack.
He's a typical Demokook blinded by Bush hatred.
Why?
He's an expert. We're not and you're not. He actually has experience that we don't and you don't. He has an informed point of view and he knows how to get the facts and present them. Can he be fooled? Certainly. Did Bush avoid service in Vietnam? Yes, he did. Did Clinton have sex with Monica Lewinsky? Yes, he did. Did Bush, Cheney, Rove, Libby and the rest lie to lead America into a war? Yes, they did.
Do we care about all of that? Yes, we do. Do we need the Dan Rather's of the world, warts and all to use their experience to get good information to us so we can make informed decisions?
Oh God yes, we do, and in this age of a megaphone in the hands of every political operative, every experienced journalist, and every nutcase from here to Bagdhad, we need him now more than we ever have before.
Why?
Because he knows how to get it done. And you don't.
Flame away. You're losing.
You sound like these self-important media and Hollywood stars, acting as if they "represent us" when they haven't been elected to anything.
"... in this age of a megaphone in the hands of every political operative" - HA! Dan Blather *IS* nothing more than a political operative. He advocates the Democrat/liberal point of view under the guise of an "unbiased journalist".
THAT'S the problem I have with Blather. I'd have more respect for him (well, until his forged document fiasco) if he'd just admit his bias.
Oh, and you're remark about Bush avoiding service in Vietnam - the first day he showed up for duty in the Texas National Guard was one day more of service than Bill Clinton provided his country.
Please, let's just stick to the subject matter. Dan Rather lashed out viciously at the blogosphere when its members quickly and conclusively proved his memos were forged.
Until recently the Main Stream Media held the keys to the information kingdom. Not any more, thank goodness. It has become obvious to many that the old school journalists like Rather inevitably tint every news story they do. If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. Given that 90+% of all MSM journalists consider themselves Dems, it's only natural to expect a certain slant on every story they do. But the blogosphere bypasses that now.
the types of skills and devotion that are outlined in this interview:
checking facts with multiple sources, traveling to where news
happens, talking with witnesses, making phone calls, doing
research.
It's true that some "bloggers" are journalists. But simply knowing
how to type thoughts and opinions into WordPress does not
sidestep the need for experience, judgment and hard work.
saying, "Well, there's this new invention called the telephone,
and only a few people should be allowed to have it, because
everybody can't have it at once."
I personally am for net neutrality, however Mr. Rather's example
was a poor one. To the large backbone companies, its not a
matter of "everybody can't have it at once," its more a matter of
them wanting to recoup their investment.
Rusty Rothwell
Louisville, KY