I just realized that I've been a member of the Watcher's Council for just over three years now. It has changed a lot. Last year the original Watcher retired and he was replaced by Terry Trippany. Some bloggers, like Abba Gav and Done with Mirrors retired. Maj. Andrew Olmsted was killed in the line of duty. New bloggers joined. (I'm proud to say that I helped recruit four of them.) I'm now the fourth most senior Watcher.
But why do I enjoy being a member of the council? Because I'm with a group of extremely talented bloggers. Frankly it's flattering to be in such company.
Why is blogging important?
Here's Clark Hoyt the public editor of the New York Times:
After Farrell's rescue, a debate broke out in the British press over whether he had been "too grand" to take a safer route and embed with the British or American military. But embedding does not eliminate the risk. Just ask my former colleague Jonathan Landay of McClatchy Newspapers, who was caught in a Taliban ambush three days after Farrell was kidnapped. Four Marines were killed and three Americans and 19 Afghan soldiers were wounded. And independent reporting is often the only way to uncover truths that governments and militaries do not want the public to know, like the carnage from airstrikes.
Note that arrogant last sentence. The media sees itself as the arbiter of what we need to know. It's the gatekeeper. But what about the information that the media doesn't want the public to know?
For example one of Council colleagues, the Provocateur has been reporting on ACORN, informing us of what it is and what it isn't. The major media in the United States, though, refused to investigate this organization thoroughly, until embarrassed by Big Government. Even now the MSM (as evidenced by the laughable reaction of the NY Times public editor, Clark Hoyt, seems more concerned with being scooped, and the journalistic propriety of that scoop, than with the substance of the charge that the Times is covering for a liberal institution.
In Baltimore, ACORN led a successful initiative to change the makeup of the City Council. On the face of it, the new configuration is probably more sensible. But I remember during the campaign, TV news would feature ACORN spokespeople arguing that this was a matter of justice. But if the organization has the power to change the way we are governed, doesn't the public have a right to know about it. (I'd add that one of my state delegates works closely with ACORN. If the organization is corrupt doesn't it mean that my representative ought to be clear about her relationship with the organization?)
Or consider the recent revelation that Marc Garlasco, an investigator for Human Rights Watch has a hobby of collecting. It was council colleague, Mere Rhetoric who reported this initially and then drove it through the news cycle the way Hot Air does (.pdf).
( Did you know that the Glittering Eye beat the media to the contaminated pet food story?)
Conversely, is the media always the proper arbiter to decide what the public ought to know?
Consider the New York Times campaign against the Bush administration's tactic of tapping international calls. A recent article in the Times piled on by declaring the program ineffective. Contrary to the Times, Terror Wonk tells us that this has been a useful tool. (Ironically, he got his information here from the Times.)
The case of Najibullah Zazi is a bit different. He had the wit to attempt to produce his own explosives, but that raises problems of a different sort. It appears that the process of acquiring the supplies and preparing the explosives left an extensive trail for law enforcement to follow. It is also appears that some intelligence agencies were interested in his activities beforehand, probably due to his travels to Pakistan, as his cel-phone was tapped.
Clark Hoyt may claim that the media's the only source for citizenry to find out what government does. But the media has shown that it is a poor judge of determining of what we ought and ought not to know.
More generally, a certain sclerosis has set into to reporting. Reporters know which experts will confirm their won thesis, but don't necessarily know which experts will explain a story or shed new light on a situations. Bloggers, free from those constraints, often draw on interests or expertise that remains untapped.
I'm honored to be serving alongside a group who stands out in this way.
Anyway, here are this week's - Tossing Little Green Footballs Out Of The Game
Read. Enjoy, Be informed.
Posted by SoccerDad at September 29, 2009 6:39 AM