|
|
---|
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
I began my "Quick hits and pinks picks: G20 edition" post below with a little friendly fire: newspapers are still the go-to, best source of coverage for events like the G20, regardless of what the blogosphere would have you believe. How convenient that I should read Tony Barber's Brussels Blog at FT.com shortly thereafter.
While breaking the news of a brilliant bit of political gamesmanship by UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown at the EU Summit of March 19-20, Barber eloquently expressed a similar sentiment. He calls newspapers the "first draft of history", while blogs have the special responsibility of providing the "second version", as he has done with his Brown story.
Barber managed to state clearly what I often struggle to properly express: that newspapers still matter. While clearly a medium in decline, its collective reputation, access and quality of reporting is still unmatched. Noone can consistently break the news like print media, and I include the websites of these publications in that category (the convergence of print/online staff, resources and editorial coverage has accelerated in recent years). You can find better analysis and insight in the blogosphere (like at, say...IPE Journal). But until the official press corps' in world capitals incorporate more non-traditional sources (perhaps President Obama calling on Sam Stein of The Huffington Post at his first press conference was a breakthrough), newspapers will continue to craft the "first-draft" history.
And I may be too nostalgic, but there is still something so familiar, romantic even, about holding my Financial Times in the morning. It appeals to your senses in a way digital media cannot. I come from a family of newspaper and radio men and women, and I still cling to these media, while embracing the progress of the digital age. I hope this delicate balance is sustainable, but I fear it is not.
Labels: blogging