Why Blogs can Win

Wulfgar's Weblog Awards are done. (Thanks to those of you who voted for me.)

In reading an assortment of the Montana 'blogs out there, many of which I didn't even know about before Wulfgar's hard work, I came to realize that the arrogant disdain of many in the more orthodox media is completely unearned. While in a few cases our writing may not be as polished as that we find in our state's newspapers, I think the quality of the 'reporting' is often better. The analysis is almost always better.

As I was surfing around the internet this evening, I came across this article from today's Tribune. Let me preface what I am about to say by emphasizing that I don't have anything against the article's author, Matt Gouras. In fact, I think he usually does a pretty good job.

Yet, this is newspaper reporting today. One side is asked to give its point of view: the budget is sustainable. Then, in the name of 'balance, the other side gives its point of view: no it isn't. And the reader has no idea whether it is or isn't.

Can you imagine Wulfgar or Cece writing in such a way? I can't. I'm pretty sure they would actually look at the budget and research whether or not most of the line items were or were not one time expenditures, or whether they were likely to cause future budget woes. And if the answer were a gray one, I would guess they (like most bloggers) would offer an at least moderately reasoned analysis of one point of view or another.

The most amazing part of it all, too, is that Wulfgar, Cece, and all the rest, as a general rule, have full-time jobs that don't involve analyzing detailed budget issues and writing detailed columns about them.

Sometimes I think that the amateurs should be looking down their noses at the pros.