Blogging vs Mainstream Media and Other Digressions.
I’m sad to announce that my life is getting pretty busy from now through the end of the month. I’ll still be posting pretty regularly. Howeveras the Hard Conversations posts require a lot more time to write, a good bit of research, and some time moderating or participating in discussion, I’ll be interspersing some other posts along the way.
As I’ve written elsewhere on this blog, part of my interest in blogging stems from the opportunity to respond to the mainstream media. In my meager experience, medical journalists in the mainstream media are journalists first, and vaguely medical second. The writing is often excellent – crisp, succinct, and well presented, far better than my admittedly amateurish style here. Sadly the science and medicine are often misstated, or distorted to have more shock value, or “pop”. I’d like to think that despite my stylistic demerits I make up some ground on accuracy.
Lately parts of the blogosphere have been a twitter with responses to a review of Openlab 2008 published by New Scientist. The general discussion is on the merits of the blogosphere vs the main stream media. Personally I think they both have their place.
It’s far too easy to use the blogosphere to confirm all of your own viewpoints rather than learn anything – something we’ve seen quite regularly in the comments on this blog! I think of the blogosphere as a whole as a supplement to the mainstream media, rather than it’s replacement.
In roughly that vein, today I’d like to direct your attention to an interesting post at Not Exactly Rocket Science. Ed Yong has a great perspective on this, since he writes both in the mainstream media and on his blog. I think he presents a balanced, accurate, and succinct view on the subject.
For now, enjoy!