The freedom of the press is a significant feature of western democracies. With this freedom comes the inevitable result of powerful media outlets arising. With the emergence of the internet as a convenient tool for accessing news, the internet itself is becoming a new medium for the press. The emergence of the internet as a medium for the press has also ushered in the growing popularity of the blogosphere, where anyone can write about anything they so choose, without qualifications, and get their message out to a large audience. Despite the attempts of the mainstream media to portray themselves as benign, almost uninterested actors in American society, it is evident that the press has a far reaching influence on society. As such, the blogosphere seems to be continually growing and will ultimately become a facet of the American press, which will in fact influence American society at large.

    My purpose is to think through some of the unfortunate effects the blogosphere will have on American society. However, I do understand that writing a blog largely dedicated to discredit blogs in general will at many times almost urge the reader to stop reading and find another source for the topic, however, since I am speaking in general terms about the blogosphere, the reader can hope that I am an exception to the general rule. Furthermore I must say that I am not prescribing what should be done about some of the more undesirable results from the blogosphere, merely describing what I think will happen when blogs become a widely accessed source for news and opinion.

    First we must realize that the blogosphere is a young market right now, but will ultimately mature like other media markets, such as print and television. As bloggers become more popular the result is that a blogger who posts on a certain web site will be able to attract a certain number of viewers. Viewers or web site hits will develop a market value. Some are already realizing this and making money off of the advertising dollars it can attract. At some point in the course of these events some of the more popular bloggers will realize they could be making money blogging and will require monetary compensation for their work. (Interestingly enough Ashley M. Herer of the AP has done reporting on “left-leaning” bloggers trying to establish a labor union.) Sooner rather than later it seems that we will see the rise of “professional bloggers.” Ultimately the blogosphere will become an industry where people will write for monetary compensation.

    Now since there are no qualifications to be a blogger and the willingness of people to blog for free it is unlikely that many will get paid for blogging and the ones that do will probably get unsubstantial rewards for their efforts and very likely will have popularized their name through other media outlets such as radio, television or print press. The thing to keep in mind is not precisely how the market will develop but that there is money to be made and with that affirmation the blogosphere is likely to grow and garner a wider influence.

    You must be wondering what my problem with the development of the blogosphere into an industry is? In short the problem with the blogosphere as it gains recognition as a viable media outlet is that it makes it much easier to spread libelous, slanderous and untrue information a lot faster to large groups of people and does so without any of the repercussions the traditional media would have to avoid. At present this is not as big of an issue as it could become. Right now blogs tend to discredit themselves internally, simply by being a blog. But as the influence grows people very well could start to quote blogs as they would any other media. If blogs or bloggers become a reliable source even colloquially we will have an influential part of the press that has absolutely no standards of fact checking nor any concern for libel or slander. What then is there to prevent a blogger with considerable influence from fabricating a story about a fellow citizen with the intent of discrediting him, and destroying his reputation? In our climate of unconstrained speech anywhere at any time and the difficulties in regulating the internet I find it hard to believe the government would be of any help. So what are we left with to protect the public from abuses from the press, the integrity of web site administrators, the public perception (which is malleable) that blogs are not reliable sources?

    One blogger in Herer’s article contended that as soon as bloggers get paid it will “increase the level of professionalism.” But why? People choose blogs over the plethora of newspaper websites that are already professional. So, why do people read blogs? Well many of them offer commentary about news stories, or at least concocted news stories and there defining mark is unprofessionalism such as swear words and spelling errors. They are written in colloquial language and they play on popular stereotypes and prejudices. It seems to me that if you “professionalized” the blogosphere you would eliminate the very reasons people participate in it in the first place, and they would opt to go back to print media and/or newspaper websites.

    With this in mind we might at least be apprehensive about the effects of the blogosphere on our younger more influential generations. As the industry grows and people are courted by pop-up ads and other advertising devices, the younger generations (who are more likely to receive news via the internet at the outset) will be directed to go to web sites that have no standards for quality, with writers who have no qualification for even the minimal requirements to be a journalist. And these sites are going to be the ones who inform people about news and current events? Add to this that public school systems are becoming less and less interested in teaching children how to discern truth and falsehood and you have a problem.

    For a real life example of what is happening go over to www.dailykos.com and you will see what I am talking about. American public figures are routinely slandered, conspiracy theories are given access to the recommended diary section and people quote Wikipedia to back up their opinions. In short they regularly break laws that the press in this country wouldn’t think of breaking. Furthermore if you read long enough it becomes clear that after subjecting themselves to this type of literature the subscribers of the DailyKos have a dwindling grip on reality. People have dismissed them as left-wing fanatics or wackos (and this is not a completely invalid criticism) but more accurately they are just incoherent, having no discernible political philosophy or worldview. The diaries posted are by and large inane and pointless and it is clear that technological sophistication has surpassed their knowledge of government, philosophy and religion. But none of this has stopped their influence from reaching to the highest levels of the Democratic Party. It seems as though they have gained what Rodney Stark called a critical mass in society, or a group of people, even a minority who are mobilized and influencing society at a rapid pace.

    In summation, as stated earlier I have no recommendations to counteract this phenomenon. It is merely a sad observation of our society that people have degraded themselves to this level, when true knowledge is so readily accessible, and is bypassed for emotionalism and fanaticism. What can be said if looking for recommendations is that as the blogosphere grows participants as well as administrators ought to be careful about what they post, or what they allow to posted on the internet, in a system where the only check is the integrity of the web site itself.