Rory Cellan-Jones, the BBC’s admirable Tech expert has a puzzling post on his blog in which he claims that:
So far, it’s been a much better election for the mainstream media – or the “MSM” as they’re described by an often contemptuous blogosphere – than you might have expected. The bloggers hoped they would boss this campaign, breaking stories, setting the mood, and leaving the flat-footed old media types trailing in its wake.
But the newspapers, and in particular the broadcasters have proved far more influential, with the TV debates dwarfing every other aspect of the campaign.
He then goes on to tell a story about a Tory candidate, Joanne Cash, who took exception to an article about her in the Sunday Times by a journalist named Camilla Long. But instead of grinning and bearing it, Ms Cash hit back on Twitter. Rory also cites the way in which the Labour ex-minister, Tom Watson (a formidable twitterer btw) immediately rebutted on his blog an incorrect story about him in a national newspaper.
Rory thinks that these examples illustrate the way in which online media make things different this time. And of course, at one level he’s right. But IMHO they’re just trivial examples and suggest that he’s missing the bigger picture.
Also, on a pedantic note, I’d like to see some evidence for his assertion that denizens of the “contemptuous” blogosphere “hoped they would boss this campaign, breaking stories, setting the mood, and leaving the flat-footed old media types trailing in its wake”. I can’t remember any blogger expressing such sentiments. Or have I just been missing a meme?