Bloggers Aren't Rebels, and Journalism Is Still Lazy
This article in the Times is headlined "As Corporate Ad Money Flows Their Way, Bloggers Risk Their Rebel Reputation".
There are two problems with this.
First, I don't believe most bloggers cultivated a "rebel reputation". Most started writing about a topic because they loved it, not as a way to thumb their noses at big media. I mean, it's not like media outlets were banging down bloggers' doors, begging to give them writing jobs, while bloggers pulled some "no way man, I'm not a sellout" schtick.
And second, If bloggers love what they write about, and they're so good at it that advertisers want to give them money to continue writing, why should they turn it down?
If there's a story here, it's that big media isn't creative enough to come up with their own compelling content. Case in point: I have an acquaintance who basically wrote a story that featured her company's product and appeared under a Times writer's byline as a sort of "advertorial". It's lazy, inauthentic journalism like this that is causing people turn to blogs as authentic sources of news and opinion.
And, from a cranky blogger to Times writer Louise Story and her editor: it's MySpace, not MySpaces. Look it up--it's only part of one of the biggest tech / business stories of 2005.