Elizabeth’s Introduction to the Digital Age

For the first time in modern history, the user is truly in charge, as a consumer and as a producer” (p. 137). Dan Gillmor discusses how this statement has been and can be both beneficial and detrimental to the past and future of blogging. As he did in chapters 1-6, Gillmor once again reiterates that many individuals still fail to see blogs as legitimate sources of information. He provides several examples of when this has been proven untrue including the case of a man named Zeyad who provided an insider’s perspective to the situation in Iraq in 2003. Zeyad soon became the go-to guy for many people who were seeking some sort of personal insight into the crisis in the Middle East. “Zeyad’s reporting was just one more example of how the grassroots have emerged, in ways the professional media largely still fail to comprehend, as a genuine force in journalism” (p. 136).

A familiar phrase in the world of news—off the record—no longer has the same implications that it once did. Gillmor recounted a time when President Bush hosted several businessmen at the White House for a meeting. No members of the media were invited to attend, but what the president (and those advising him) failed to recognize was that one of the individuals sitting in the room was a blogger. The meeting soon became public knowledge.

Although blogging about a semi-secretive meeting with the president may seem taboo, Gillmor claims that it’s often those kind of topics that individuals are more inclined to write about. On Persianblog.com, authors talked about subjects that were considered inappropriate in their own community—sex, religion and politics are just a couple examples of things that were discussed. In a similar way, many women are drawn to the site www.ivillage.com because it provides them with an outlet to talk about things that aren’t always conducive to carpool conversation. Some of the most popular blogs on Ivillage focus on sex and relationships. One hundred years ago, women would never feel comfortable sharing their marital strives with anyone other than their closest friends; today it’s much easier to reveal through blogging those aspects of your life that you deem private. Some knock the reputability of blogging because a lot of the individuals discussing these topics choose to be anonymous. Shouldn’t everyone be accountable for the material they post on blogs? Gillmor argues that individuals shouldn’t feel that need to hide behind firewalls. Gillmor also thinks anonymous blogs are not as reliable as those blogs where the authors identify themselves.

Gillmor devotes a lot of time to covering the brain engine that is Wikipedia.com and explaining how information that is posted on that site is deemed truthful by those individuals who devote time to ensuring the accuracy of the content. In this section, Gillmor also talks about the “broken window” syndrome. Websites like Wiki take proactive steps to removing inappropriate or incorrect information in hopes that their reputation as a reliable hub of information is preserved.

Gillmor attempts to explain how and why bloggers are limited by what they write but I think he could have made a stronger point by including more real life accounts of how individuals who post inaccurate information are reprimanded. By including these examples, I think Gillmor’s argument that blogs are a legitimate source of news would be strengthened. He also mentioned how some blogs allow users to comment on their advertisements. This is the first I’ve heard of anything like this and I wish he would have gone into greater detail and even interviewed an advertiser to get their opinion on the practice. I think Gillmor does an excellent job of strengthening his own arguments, but he rarely ever introduces individuals into his writings who disagree with him. I think it would be interesting (and refreshing) to hear opinions that differ from his. I’d also like to ask Gillmor how a site like Wikipedia gets away with not paying any of their contributors…Do the executives make all of the money? Would treating each author like a freelance writer provide a greater sense of security for the site? What if writers were paid for their submissions only after the material was reviewed for factual accuracy? Wouldn’t people be more likely to guarantee that their work was authentic?

In explaining some of the misinformation that’s often placed on Web sites, Gillmor points to the fact that the information posted on sites is often not reviewed by any other eyes than the author’s. While he sees this as a drawback, some people like Corey Doctorow see that as the reason why they are able to distinguish themselves from other mainstream journalists—they can post information instantaneously.

I must admit that Gillmor makes a compelling case for blogging. A couple of weekends ago, I was on an AirTran flight back home to Charleston, South Carolina. My work has me travelling for the next couple of weeks and I thought it only fair if my miniature yorkie could stay with my parents while I was away. In order to transport him from Washington to Charleston, I had no choice but to purchase a $50 ticket for him. Unfortunately, the flight attendants were not dog lovers. They made my flight extremely painful (and my dog’s experience even worse). While I was sitting there ruminating in my misery, I thought, ‘How could I tell animal lovers out there never to fly AirTran because of how poorly they treat people who are travelling with pets?’ I’ve yet to post a blog about it, but reading Gillmor’s book make me feel a little more compelled to do so. How much of an impact could I make?