To cut right to the chase, if Mayhill Fowler had been a mainstream reporter, there would be no controversy.
She asked a question, with a recorder in open site, and he answered. It was clear from the comments that people were trying to calm him down, but he wanted to say what he wanted to say. Clinton had no intention of stopping his tirade against the author of the Vanity Fair article.
The main point of discussion among the mainstream media about this incident was that Fowler didn't identify herself as a reporter. But shouldn't a person as politically savvy as Bill Clinton know not to go on a rant like that even in front of only a supporter?
Shouldn't he know not to go off like that when there is a tape recorder in his face? It was a failure of his own composure, not of independent journalism.
Also, it's not like the mainstream press doesn't do things like this on its own. Reporters often frame questions in a way that will provoke the answer that they want to hear, and they often print that response as well. But when a blogger does it, it is suddenly unprofessional.
The mainstream media prides "if you said it, I'm going to print it," but not when it comes to independent journalists, apparently.
It would be different if what she did was so outside journalistic practices, but it wasn't. Mainstream media provokes all the time. They go under cover and don't always tell people they're reporters. But this was so different why? Because they didn't have the courage to ask that question themselves?
It is a double standard that for an independent outlet to get the same kind of recognition they must be better, almost more "professional" than the mainstream in order to be taken seriously. Hopefully as the number of blogs and online media outlets grows, that will change.
No comments:
Post a Comment