Today I complete two years blogging conversations. Its so funny - I've been telling everyone that I have been blogging 3 years and not 2 - I really thought so, some days I feel I have been blogging forever. I was just Skyping with Stuart, who started me blogging and I asked him what title I should have for my post - and hehehehe, he said Old Lady !

So Old Lady Blogger I must be :):):).

11:18:05 AM    comment []  trackback []

There has been a lot of outrage in the Indian Blogworld around the Mediaah! vs Media Biggie 'war'. Mediaah! has been fiercely critical of one of our largest dailies which has responded with a libel suit and a demand to remove 19 posts from the Mediaah! blog. Rather than remove the quotes, Pradyuman Maheshwari chose to shut down the blog.

Mark Glaser has one of the more comprehensive reports on the whole issue. There's an online petition to protest this action. One anonymous blogger quickly set up Mediaha, a blog that contains the 19 blog posts which have been quoted in the legal suit against Mediaah! as well as the seven-page legal notice from the Publication.

I've signed the petition myself too because I am sad to see a blogger denied his voice under such pressure.

Still, there are questions floating around about whether Mediaah! was really asking for trouble with its fierce and consistent targetting of one publication. Peter quotes extensively from Sevanti Ninan's article in The Hoot on the affair:

"It was gossipy and irreverent. The nineteen posts ordered off were a mix of critique and news stories about the Times group. Defamation could be alleged not because of actual content but because of sustained targeting. The blog fired away merrily at the TOI, almost every single day. It had a source or sources within the newspaper, and that became its major selling point. It is hardly surprising that they moved to plug the leak. If somebody were to malign either Maheshwari or Mediaah! day in and day out, would either keep quiet?"

Dance with Shadows raises a counterpoint and some advice for aspiring media commentators.

Dilip reminds us to look at it from the viewpoint of conversations and the changing communication network by quoting from Dan Gillmor's book, We the Media: Grassroots Journalism by the People for the People -- taken from a review of the book in the Guardian:

"Big media ... treated the news as a lecture. We told you what the news was. You bought it, or you didn't. You might write us a letter; we might print it ... it was a world that bred compacency and arrogance on our part. It was a gravy train while it lasted, but it was unsustainable.

"Tomorrow's news reporting and production will be more of a conversation or a seminar. The lines will blur between producers and consumers, changing the role of both in ways we're only beginning to grasp. The communication network itself will be a medium for everyone's voice, not just the few who can afford to buy multimillion-dollar printing presses, launch satellites, or win the government's permission to squat on the public airways."

So was Pradyuman Maheshwari naive not to expect this fallout having gone after the media biggie hammer and tongs? If you're willing to pack a punch, does the other not have right to retort? Don't we see this happening in comments at our own blogs on issues? For a publication, readership draws revenues and reputation is one of the large drivers for readership. If someone attacks reputation, not once but consistently over a period of time, in the best way they can, I'm a little surprised why people are so outraged that the publication responds in the best way they know to stop this happening? If someone was out to get you - would you not retaliate to try and shut them up in the most effective way you thought possible? No hold's barred?

Or take the case of Apple winning a suit to get bloggers to reveal sources of insider information. Bloggers today have no protection, and an Online Coalition to urge the FEC to consider bloggers as a legitimate voice in the media is on. And in the wake of the Apple case, Steve Rubel points to an editorial embracing the notion that bloggers deserve the same shield-law protections accorded to other journalists.

This really isn't about old media vs new media or big vs small. Dave Sifry of Technorati offers links as a measure to discuss the impact of weblogs on traditional media, and reveals that:

"The most influential media sites on the web are still well-funded mainstream media sites, like The New York Times, The Washington Post, and CNN. However, a lot of bloggers are achieving a significant amount of attention and influence. Blogs like bOingbOing and Instapundit are highly influential, especially among technology and political thought leaders, and sites like Gizmodo are seeing as much influence as mainstream media sites like MTV.com."

With this growing influence of blogs, its time to reflect on how we prevent what happened to Mediaah! from happening again - as individual bloggers and as a community. What can we do as individuals? And if it did - then what would suggestions be for the most appropriate action. It also makes me think again of the power of blogging. The responsibility that comes with such power. Responsibility that makes us less vulnerable to such actions that shut out our voices. In the recognition that its always a two-way street.

10:14:09 AM    comment []  trackback []