51% of journalist read blog, 1% think they are credible
According to a Euro RSCG/Columbia study, 51% of journalist read blogs. But despite using blogs for researching and referencing facts (43%) and finding sources (36%), only 1% of journalist said blogs are credible. Why would you use any source you didn’t deem credible? And it’s a little ironic that this is being reported in a blog. I find this number to be extremely low. And would count blogs (in general) as being just as, if not more credible than traditional media.
The study also says that journalist use blogs for finding story ideas and sources. This particular interesting since I was interviewed based on a article on my blog. (And yes I will keep bring that up, since it’s the only time I was ever mentioned in the newspaper without the words, “Still at large.”)
A good example of the media using blogs for sources and content is Open Source. An NPR show which defines itself as “Not a show about blogs. It will use blogs to be a show about the world.” Where they interview blog writers about political/social events. I particularly like the way Open Source defines a blog:
A blog is a way of thinking. It’s a way of recording the argument you are having with yourself, admitting that you may be about to be wrong, and ensuring that, when you are wrong, you make your wrongness available as a public record. A blog is Socratic that way; it knows that it does not know.
How long until blogs replace mainstream journalism? Well that’s anyones guess. But I think it will happen, as I read more blogs than articles in print. So there you have it, my 1%.