The backlash against the blogosphere is now in full swing. Here's the Weekly Standard take on Yearly Kos; and here's TNR on same. Christine Rosen's take-down of Glenn Reynolds can be found here. Money quote:
Reynolds's blog consists largely of links to news or opinion articles and other blogs followed by comments consisting of such profound observations as "Heh," or "Read the whole thing," or "Indeed." (These are recurring tropes whose centrality can't be exaggerated.) What Reynolds lacks in analysis, he makes up for in abundance of content. On any given day, he'll provide his readers nearly 20 entries--or, if you can stomach it, more.
"These days it is about the reporter, not the story; the actor, not the play; the athlete, not the game. Leopold is a product of a narcissistic culture that has not stopped at journalism's door, a culture facilitated and expanded by the Internet."
Ouch. Some of this strikes me as overkill. The blogosphere has unleashed amazing new potential for great commentary, analysis and journalism. It has also unleashed real nastiness, group-think, and glibness. It is both much shallower and more temporal than print-journalism, but also, because of its capacity to follow up stories and, most importantly, to hyperlink to vast databases, much deeper. The MSM is beginning to understand the potential of this new medium and coopt it. Nothing wrong with that. We are at the dawn of this medium. And it hasn't begun to teach us its ultimate potential yet. Sometimes we have to make mistakes and pursue blind alleys to figure it out.
(Update: a Kossack objects to Ryan Lizza's account of a panel discussion here.)