The revelation was picked up by Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit immediately, and was soon followed by the author of the web's most popular mid-western political blog, Iowa Voice, where I myself am a guest author:
Without getting into what he asked and all that, I just want to comment on the implications that bloggers have been "told" what to write and what to say about any number of subjects from any number of sources ... All that Marshall (Senior PR Executive for Wal-Mart and active blogger himself) asked was if I would be interested in getting news updates every once in a while on stories/issues about Wal-Mart. Since I was already signed up for other sites that provided the same thing (some for Wal-Mart, some against), I said "ok". I saw no problem with it, and to be honest, I still don't. I have a number of similar subscriptions from any number of sources: MoveOn, the Kerry campaign, the Nussle campaign, the Leonard campaign, the DNC, the GOP, and so on. In other words, I get updates from BOTH sides of the issue before I go shooting off a post. I look into the facts before I form an opinion and before I write a post. Most bloggers get some form of press release or "insider info."
The piece went on to disclose the potential nature of Barbaro's piece:
"I'm pretty sure this piece is going to be either a hit-piece against bloggers, a hit-piece against Wal-Mart, or quite possibly both." The author was also quite candid about his open-policy to receiving PR from big corporations:
Just so we're clear: neither Wal-Mart, nor anyone connected to them, have ever said "Here, print this", and they certainly haven't offered any money to us. They invited us to visit the HQ down in Bentonville, but I declined (they didn't offer to pay for that, either). I have zero problem with ANY company, group, or politician issuing a press release to a blogger. After all, it's their job that they get their side of the story out as much as possible.
Not in Michael Barbaro's oppinion, apparently. His line of questioning to the above bloggers seems to have been aggressive and penetrating - as if he was searching for a sign that Wal-Mart was planting stories he himself should have been honoured with. In reality, of course, it is just that Wal-Mart has recognized the game is changing.
“While AOL also declined to discuss margins, or any other numbers, we would assume 50,000 downloads (of AOL instant messenger are taking place) daily as a conservative guess" write Scoble and Irael in their new bestseller Naked Conversations. "What would that cost with a traditional marketing campaign like direct mail? ... $2 million dollars daily. Free versus $2 million a day? You choose.”
Article comments
1 - Eric Berlin
Very interesting piece, Daniel, really enjoying your work now day after day !
2 - gypsyman
Right now all this sounds like is a bunch of conjecture backed up by undisclosed sources. Everyone is assuming that the writer in question is losing his edge and jealously trying to bring down bloggers.
Maybe it's time everybody got over themselves and takes a deep breath before ruining a man's career and reputation by trying to guess what he is going to write about and what his intentions are.
Of course WalMart are going to circumvent the mainstream media whenever they can, they are no ones idea of good co-operate citizens with their purchasing and labour policies. If they are able to earmark bloggers who have shown a willingness to follow a party line or speak their language, they are going to.
If the president of the United States all of a sudden stopped issuing press releases to the major news outlets, and only sent them to selected bloggers, what would your reaction be?
You can say, well WalMart is a privately owned company and the President has an obligationto keep all media informed so that's different, but if WalMart isn't informing the New York Times or any of the "liberal" media outlets, then they are trying to control who hears what when about their actions.
Sorry pinpointin advertising is one thing, but selective news releases is no different from embeding mediea. It's a means of controlling access to the news no matter how you cut it.
gypsyman
3 - Scott Butki
Until we see what this guy writes isn't all this just as much conjecture as his questions to the bloggers except that in his case he probably talked to both parties while there's no indication bloggers did the same.
4 - Mike H
The news services of this world must not be allowed to die. Nor do I believe that they will. However, there are a number of disturbing trends that are leading to its overshadowing:
1. Blogs - Blogs are not the news, just as the editorial section of your local newspaper is not news. Blogs are a collection of people's opinions much as I am writing now. My personal blog reads much more like a Dave Barry column than an issue of the New York Times. I don't expect people to take what I say as fact. Should I comment on the latest suicide bombing in Iraq or Palestine, do not for a moment believe that I was there or am by any stretch of the imagination an expert on the subject. This leads me into my next point.
2. The Entertainment News Media - More and more many reputable news outlets are putting honest journalism by the wayside in favour of enterainment news. This is a ploy to draw advertising revenue without which the news outlets would not be able to afford to send journalists around the world. However, it has had the negative effect of influencing what the journalists report and even the integrity of those reports. To increase ratings, a spin or angle on a story must be found; there is no angle in journalism, only the facts.
So while competition in journalism is favourable and serves to prevent bias, the existence of too many outlets is leading to a disintegration of the medium. Remember, if your fingers don't turn black reading it, its not a newspaper.
5 - Chris
I was also one who also was called by Michael Barbaro last Friday as well as an email. My blog has always promoted free markets and capitalism. In fact I have many posts relating to Wal-mart before I ever had any contact with Marshall Manson.
I even had a post early this morning about the assembling onslaught I see that is started here above.
On the side of the people - NOT
6 - Justin
Hey I can barely read this thing because it reeks of its own self importance. Maybe if you toned down the drama a little bit I might actually care.
7 - aj
*agrees with justin*
8 - jibus
wait and see people. blogs and corps are going to go head to head and we will see where the moneys at. can the inter web comunity solidify fast and effecent enough to combat the tried true practices of american journalism?
9 - svidurr
issuing this rant as potentially 'the biggest' media story of the year reeks of close-minded perspective.
assuming that corporate sponsorship has ANYTHING to do with the actual face of journalism essentially indicates you have no idea what the function of a journalist is.
and comparing an editorial blog to legit reporting is purely absurd.
10 - Christopher Rose
I think the "inter web community" is only just getting started. It may very well come to pass that in the not-so-distant future the entire relationship between bloggers and the media and even what those terms are seen to mean is going to change quite radically and profoundly.
I have a very clear idea in mind of how it might unfold. Unfortunately, some of the necessary technology, like a truly good blogging platform, only exists in my imagination - so far...
Stars, just found myself thinking "wish I was a nerd". I need coffee!
11 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Chris,
The relationships you mention in comment #11 are already shifting. In this country, much that is legitmate news is purposely shut out by the mainstream media, which has a politcal axe of its own to grind. This means that the blogosphre or e-mail is how news gets around. Independent investigators/reporters gather the data a throw it out to small on-line news gatherers where they get sent out further, etc. etc.
Many independent folks have been bought out and the one independent radio station was driven off the air a year or two ago by the government. It now operates as an internet station. The government is tryng to close that down too, but hasn't got the gumption just to shut them down, as they might in an open dictatorship.
12 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
I need coffee!
BTW Chris, I was thinking of you. Just had a cup.
13 - Christopher Rose
If any ubergeeks read this and want to help develop the technical side of my idea, I'd be delighted to hear from them.
14 - harry
this isnt the first time that this blog writer man has claimed such utter bullshit, remember that google one, where he demanded to know why google wouldnt show up his blog or some crap?
[Personal attack deleted]
15 - Scott Butki
So when is the article supposed to be published?
16 - Scott Butki
Oh the story is up and if the first five paragraphs are accurate than I'm disturbed.
17 - Scott Butki
Biggest story of the year?
Um, yeah.
That whole Valerie Plame thing is so not a story anymore.
Here's a good take on the issue.
Like it or not the Times reporter seesm to be pointing a valid complaint about bloggers doing what sloppy journalists also do - digesting and hten giving to the readers that which is spoon fed to them.
18 - mike
American Journalism should not be confused with real journalism. American news networks are shallow, stupid and not informative or educating in a very least. watching cnn is like watching special olympics when compared to such quality news as bbc or du. also, american journals are wawful if compared with economist for example. I would love to see big media die in this country
19 - Scott Butki
I agree with you when it comes to tv journalism. I disagree with you when it comes to newspapers.
20 - Scott Butki
I think it telling that the author of this hit piece on the NYT writer never returned and posted after the actual article was published.
21 - Daniel M. Harrison
"I think it telling that the author of this hit piece on the NYT writer never returned and posted after the actual article was published."
Scott, I did write a follow- up:
See "Barbaro and The New York Times Don't Understand New Media". If you go to "all articles by Daniel M. Harrison", you'll find it.
22 - Scott Butki
Ah, ok. I thought you would mention it here but now you have.
Let me make a live link for you, which would have been a helpful thing for you to do, being part of "new media" and all.
The new piece is here.
23 - Daniel M. Harrison
"Let me make a live link for you, which would have been a helpful thing for you to do, being part of "new media" and all."
Thanks, that's a fair criticism too.
D