Technology Blogs Versus the New York Times

Interesting article from the New York Times discussing the journalistic credibility of technology blogs – Get the Tech Scuttlebutt! It Might Even Be True. The article leads of with an account involving Gawker and TechCrunch. In May, both blogs reported that Apple was in negotiations to buy Twitter:

“Neither story [on either site] was true. Not that it mattered to the authors of the posts. They suspected the rumor was groundless when they wrote the items. TechCrunch noted, 133 words into
its story, that, “The trouble is we’ve checked with other sources who claim to know nothing about any Apple negotiations.”

But they reported it anyway….

Such news judgment is not unusual among blogs covering tech. For some blogs, rumors are their stock in trade.”

Interestingly, the bloggers quoted in the article don’t really (or at least aren’t given the opportunity to) defend their integrity.   In a fairly expansive quote “the bloggers” say they do not engage in rumor-mongering, but rather in “involving the readers in the reporting process”.   As they don’t “have the luxury of a large staff to confirm everything”.   

The articles goes on to compare blogging to the “truth-be-damned
approach” to journalism prevalent in the early 1900s when there were
many more newspapers competing for readers.   In the end, newspapers
“embraced credibility” but “lost … their pizzazz”.  It seems to me the gloves are coming off as blogs compete more and more successfully with mainstream traditional media.  Having given up their pizzazz, the traditional media clings fiercely to its credibility.  But do readers agree?  Do you find the argument that traditional media is more credible credible?