I'd like "Snarky" for $100, Alex

Posted at 9:23 AM on February 15, 2006 by Bob Collins (3 Comments)

A smackdown requires me to note that I had the name of the new blog wrong. It's not MNvolved. It's minvolved. It's a new site put together by long-time bloggers in the area and has promise to be something more than just another grenade-thrower. But, c'mon folks, toughen up the skin. This ain't a fight against cancer, here.

Comments (3)

Now that we have the silliness out of the way, thanks for the link. We do have pretty thick skin, but as you are probably very aware, there are certain things that must be protected in the news/quasi-news/DIY-news business and our readers' input is one of them. Our "coverage" isn't much by MPR's standards, but it's pretty damn good for an "editorial board" that only "works" between 5:00-6:30 AM each morning. Plus--and we say this as a loyal MPR listener, member, and genuine fan--we wanted to point out that you come off as kind of snobbish (a little bit of the "lording over the masses" type of thing) when you put bloggers' work in quotation marks. Where can we find agreement/sympathy/empathy on this point? Even though you have a blog, you're still a part of MPR and, as we're sure you're well aware, a lot of folks who like to think that the media is some sort of liberal elite establishment view anything that you (and your employer) put out as nothing more than liberal "coverage" of whatever. This clearly isn't the case and it is unfair for people to say so without the facts to back it up.

Summary: We have very thick skin but that doesn't prohibit us from sticking up for our readers' input and from responding quickly when it is called into question or put in quotations marks.

We like your site and we will continue to read it. We urge you not to fall into the trap that kills most established media blogs. What is the trap? Well, part of the solution for not falling into the trap lies in finding the answer out by oneself. We will say this: Folks didn't read Smart Set because it published a bunch of writing by authors no one had ever heard of (the early-century equivalent of linking). Nope, they read it because of the editorial voices of Mencken and Nathan. Strong and meaningful editorial voices don't engage in balance for balance's sake. Their balance comes in the form of consistency of conviction and character. This is pretty much the same reasons why some blogs work and others don't. When one of the Hatfields goes out and kills the Town Sheriff, you are not obligated to mention that one of the McCoys jaywalked earlier in the day.

That being said, we think you've avoided the trap so far and we enjoy reading your site. Unlike other local established media blogs (with the exception of Eric Perkin's Olympic blog), you've managed to put enough of your personality into it to make it authentic...which is what folks are looking for.

cp

Posted by cleversponge | February 15, 2006 5:08 PM

Oh, this is a long conversation best had over a brew but I'll wade in ever so gently. The word "coverage" is in quotation marks precisely for the reason you describe. If MPR says something is coverage, it conveys something akin to what a reporter would provide. From a traditional standpoint, it wasn't coverage. But I didn't have a better word when I was writing it (the morning stuff is all written on my own time, by the way, usually in the company of a good dog and a bad cup of coffee).

So I didn't want to convey that was was provided was a news item in the traditional journalism sense.

But, like I said, I didn't have a better word handy. The intent was not to belittle the value of what was there. Which brings me to the next point.

We -- bloggers and MSM -- are wasting a tremendous amount of time worrying about each other, whether one values the other or where one sees the other fitting in to the other's activities.

I'll be honest with you. Few reporters at MPR read blogs. And that's too bad because they should. And someday, they -- or their replacement -- will. I've written somewhat extensively about the whole "what happens when MSM blogs," specifically at MPR so I won't repeat myself.

I think if MPR wants boring factoids on a Web site, they should just save their money. To the extent that they haven't shut down Polinaut so far, it's either because (a) they recognize that the personality of a "journalist" will change over the next 10 years to be more transparent and accept it or (b) haven't got a clue that Polinaut exists or know what I'm doing with it. I'm not betting the retirement fund on (a), but I'm not conceding that it's (b) either... yet.

I also think that bloggers are wasting a tremendous amount of time trying to define what blogs are or what they will be. An editorial voice? Yeah, I guess that works to a degree although at some point one can get mighty bored reading Daily Koz and Red State. I think the trick is to recognize something important about politics: that people don't REALLY fit into the mold that party hacks want you to believe they fit into.

I think it's possible to agree with Republicans sometimes, and Democrats other times, and Greens even other times.

Politics is personal. Blogs are personal. Journalism is not personal. But there's a maelstrom of convergence coming.

Good of you to write.

Posted by Bob Collins | February 15, 2006 5:43 PM

Well put. We especially agree with it being a waste of time to try to define what blogs are and what they should be. Some joker actually wrote a book about it...Hugh something or other. Blogs are written talk show calls and little more. Now, there are informative calls and there are your uneducated fork lifter calls. To this extent, we've thought hard about how we want to convey our personality, character, and content. There has to be definition somewhere in the editorial process...even if it is just one Sponge.

We understand what you were trying to say with the quotations. Sometimes, the written electronic word just doesn't seem to convey the proper sentiment...but that's another conversation that should best be continued over a brew.

We hope that you avoid the fate of St. Joans...may the MPR Pope never find out about you.

cp

Posted by cleversponge | February 15, 2006 7:03 PM

Services

• Hourly Newscast
• HD Radio
• iPhone App / Mobile
• E-mail newsletters
• RSS feeds
• Podcasts
• Submit your photos
• Videos
• Weather
• Most e-mailed stories