They Keep Using the Word 'Blog' But I Don't Think It Means What They Think It Means
by CornFromAJar on Mar 4, 2008 2:11 PM EST
in Tennessee Volunteer Football
Email
PrintTwo items came across my feed reader yesterday that nearly sent me into full Fisk mode again, both of them being more cheap shots and undue criticism of Phil Fulmer. After some consideration I've decided that neither Ron Higgin's latest salvo in his personal war against The Papa, nor this rambling and indirect narrative from Roy Exum are worthy of much deconstruction other than to say "they're here, they're dumb, get used to it."
But I have a hard time resisting the low-hanging fruit, so I will say that of Exum's column, outside of the fact that it's hard to tell whether he's criticizing or supporting Fulmer, he feels it necessary to take shots at blogs for creating an atmosphere in which coaches receive more criticism than ever before. He even finds a way to equate blogs with the KKK. We're straight evil, y'all.
If you're not familiar with Roy Exum, he and his family are former newspaper magnates in Chattanooga. I understand the resentment that many old newspaper types have for bloggers... but because I understand doesn't mean they're right. It's a misunderstanding between what the old-school journalist thinks a blog is and what a blog really is. Too often, the newspaper folks think blogs are trying to replace them; most often though, we're not.
Look at the blogs nominated or winning the College Football Blogger Awards. For the most part, they're not trying to practice journalism. But that's the misconception, that bloggers are amateur journalists. If bloggers are amateur anything, it's along the lines of amateur critics. More than that, though, blogs are about continuing a discussion among fans that used to be limited to the folks immediately around you in coffee shops, barber chairs, and dive bars; but can now be carried on around the world. BTW, that conversation usually starts in the local paper. So when an old newspaper guy like Exum starts by calling out "faceless blogs" and continues
The most unbelievable part of the whole thing is these people are today the very same ones who are gleefully pushing a picture of their own coach, superimposed in police garb, across the Internet with the words "Fulmer for Sheriff" and the vow, "So He Can Be Near His Players."
There is even a national competition on a website called "fulmercup.com" where college football teams across the country are awarded points when players are arrested for off the field incidents. At the end of the season that site, too, names a somewhat dubious national champion.
So, I'm probably not saying anything that hasn't been said before, but maybe needs to be said more often: those of us who "get" blogs and how blogging brings fans together in new and clever ways should be thankful that we have the open mindedness or pure brain capacity or whatever it is that allows us to enjoy new media without thinking that the heat death of the universe will be caused by digital ink being spilled.
And I figure the two-day Stroking of Blogger Egofest is as good a time as any to say it... so there it is.
24 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
My 0.02...
At least I can respect his opinion. He thinks that the approach Fulmer uses is the wrong approach. I can respect that, even if I can't agree. But I would strongly advise him to take under consideration that he's never had to work with these kids or look them in the eyes. It's very easy to turn Caesar's thumb down - Caesar never had to get to know the gladiators, either.
In short, with Higgins's argument, I think we all are missing far too much information to come down conclusively on the matter. Maybe Higgins is closer to "the perfect solution" than I am or Fulmer. Yet I cannot give any confidence to any opinion except Fulmer's, and we have to trust Hamilton to be the one to decide if Fulmer's doing a good job.
Exum:
"But the Internet, ..., is still unfathomable to me ..."
This hits directly to the issue of the journalistic hatred for blogs. The Internet is not properly understood. (He certainly doesn't understand Fark culture.) That's ok. Not everyone has to be internet-savvy. But it's hard to justify the rest of the article with that piece in place. In particular, it's hard to justify this stance when the issues he presents in favor of his stance are almost entirely blog-unrelated (e.g. from the 70s).
But as far as what's in the water in East Tennessee? Why, we only sing about it all the time! Why do you think it's one of our state songs?
But I'm willing to advance a hand to both of them. I'd be perfectly willing to meet them at the Orange and White game so they can put a face to at least one blog-freak. I'm willing to learn from them if they're willing to learn about me.
Agree
I didn't like that Higgins took a shot at the handling of the Britton Colquitt DUI situation without mentioning that Colquitt lost his scholarship over it. That's a pretty big deal.
The New Stephen A. Smith
I wrote a piece at my blog about Smith's comments, and I'm glad you brought this to our attention. It's clearly a prevailing attitude among the old-guard print media types that suggests their ignorance of the blogosphere.
They are hypocrites who are scared their voice will no longer be heard. The reality is, as bloggers have come to know, the voices of the past have become irrelevant. We can write just as well as they can offering a valid opinion and in most cases, a more objective point of view.
I'm not suggesting I do, but there are many well-written blogs out there that make the print media seem like "Showtime at the Apollo."
I have to disagree with hooper on one point. I'm not extending a hand to any of them. They can jump for all I care and the splat I hear will be the sound of a washed-up has-been I no longer have any use for.
Love,
MoonDog
heh
It's just that I've made enough bad judgments in my life that I should at least be willing to give somebody one chance to change theirs.
And I have no use for Smith.
Flipside
The analogy isn't valid for the very reasons Joel points out, but the fear is much the same. But heck, the blogosphere relies on the old media. Where else do we get the juicy bits to talk about? It's almost all old media or obtained in the same ways that old media gets their information.
But one ding-dong phoning or mailing a threat to a journalist before I was ever born has absolutely nothing to do with how I respond to journalists today. To make that implication is to completely trivialize what makes the Internet unique.
More on the Flipside
I agree with your opinion as it relates to the old guard media but with one exception. I don't believe we need them as you suggest.
The blogosphere will naturally create topics we can discuss. In fact, there are more issues being discussed among bloggers than what are being discussed about old sports journalists.
We can agree to disagree on that point, but I believe we can agree that Exum's comments, along with Stephen A. Smith and Bill Conlin, represent the attitude among the old guard that I discussed in my first reply.
To clear the air
/group hug
The blogosphere does indeed generate much of its own content. But the traditional media still holds most of the internal contacts for news scoops. That's changing over time, but I don't think it's to the point that the old media can be flushed. It's not so much a need of the journalists themselves as it is a need for their resources. We're still trying to get media access at UT for just one blogger. I think we agree overall, but we're arguing on different points. I see your points (I think) and I have no problem with what you're saying.
And I agree with you on the last point.
Flipside Again
You'd think with the Blog Buzz being highlighted at VolQuest every day that someone at the UT SID office would recognize the FREE advertising we're giving them.
As a group of bloggers, we could potentially generate interest among potential recruits. Think that would interest some of the folks?
That's the angle we need to use.
As far as recruits - I don't think we're far from the day (if it's not already here) where recruits set up their own usernames at blog sites related to their schools of interest. They'd be able to get a very quick and reasonably accurate read of the fan situation and the fan response to them through a few Diary entries or comments.
These kids use the Internet. Blogs are there. Like it or not, blog input will be a part of the game to some degree.
One clarification
Put them in the box with Sports Information Director Bud Ford: they don't understand. They can't see a distinction between blogs and message boards.
Honestly, though, have you ever tried to define what a blog is? There are hazards therein. I once tried in a sort of tongue-in-cheek way, and didn't quite get to it. Some differences are easy: they labor under the pretense of objectivity while we openly embrace our bias. We link, they don't. We talk, they lecture.
But some differences are more difficult to discern. They do have mailbags, so they're sort of interacting with readers. They do call themselves "blogs," and when they do, they do sort of change they way the talk, making it a bit more casual.
And . . . where was I? Hmm, that line right there is another difference.
Anyway, here's where I quit because I have no conclusion except to say that defining what a blog is is a bit of a challenge.
So I pose to you . . . what are the distinguishing characteristics of a blog, hmm?
Oh, and here's another difference -- I'm hitting publish w/ no proofreading b/c contrary to their criticism that bloggers have no editors or fact-checkers, we know better. We have thousands.
by Joel Hollingsworth on Mar 4, 2008 4:00 PM EST up reply actions
Oh, and see there?
One more difference: errors on blogs are generally corrected leaving the original error for context instead of in a retraction on page two of an error in a front page story a week earlier. Just sayin'.
by Joel Hollingsworth on Mar 4, 2008 4:07 PM EST up reply actions
Fact Checks, Slander and Libel
I've routinely pointed out errors to other bloggers. Just because we're "amateurs" doesn't mean we should act like it. We should strive to present a well-written, factually correct article because what I write as a blogger in some ways represents all bloggers.
I don't want to be the person to give bloggers a bad name, although some may argue that point with you vociferously. But the point I'm making is that any blogger taking liberty of their amateur status only hurts all of us.
Yeah, but . . .
by Joel Hollingsworth on Mar 4, 2008 4:50 PM EST up reply actions
One other difference
Ok
MDL, are you going, by any chance?
O&W?
Ah, Orange & White Game
Last time I saw the Vols play in person is when they came here the season before last. There were more Vol fans in the stands than Tiger fans. LOL!
lawvol is working on some banners and logos for me - his initial design is really cool. Can't wait to post them on my site.
Talk to you later.
Perhaps this is the major disconnect.
That . . .
by Joel Hollingsworth on Mar 4, 2008 4:54 PM EST up reply actions
I think the real reason...
i.e. If I want to go on a tirade about Fulmer, Urban Meyer, Bob Stoops, whoever... I can and I don't have anybody to answer to for it.
The media, schools, and SID's don't have that luxury. They are accountable to their organizations and don't get to say what is on their mind. Orson can drop a 100 mother****ers in one post call for Meyer's head, throw the entire secondary under the bus, and it's no biggie.
Blog critics can't do that and see the blogosphere as a bunch of unexperienced anonymous nerds who can do drive by reporting and say perpetuate whatever rumor or news we want to.
It's a tough line, but obviously RTT is good for Tennessee. BON does great things for Texas , Roll Bama Roll, etc. I just don't think that blog critics see all of that quite yet.
by threenout on Mar 4, 2008 5:57 PM EST reply actions
Dang, Guys!
I'm not familiar with either Mr. Higgins' or Mr. Exum's usual work. However, after reading both articles, Mr. Higgins comes across as plain ignorant. His article seemed to be nothing more than a 'filler' piece necessary to waste space.
Although Mr. Exum was misguided in some of his information, I found his piece to be a good read. He made some excellent points and came across as generally knowledgeable on his subject. I did note several interesting things though "like, such as":
- Bloggers remain "faceless" for a reason -- so their readers don't have to stare at such an ugly mug, unlike the readers of Mr. Exum's columns. Seriously, does one's face provide any additional crediblity? (Oooh! I know what you look like, so you must be speaking the truth!) That is, except when one's blogger of choice actually lands an MSM gig! (Next time, Joel just needs to display this" as his self-portrait!)
- He denegrates the "Fulmer for Sheriff" fark, but then posts it at the end of his article? Huh?
- We've all heard (and laughed at) "Louie in Lewisburg" on the sports radio shows. Most fans simply write this guy off as a loony and life goes on. However, there will always be the few that can't differentiate the loonies from the normals. This miscommunication is simply a fact of life, like I discussed last week.
See, Joel?
I told you that I filled the geek quotient at the Auburn game!
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SHOP THE ROCKY TOP TALK STORE
Animated Drive Charts
RTT Classics
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
