Former investigative journalist here, though I'm not entirely sure what that has to do with the topic at hand. You'll notice, if you read carefully, that I didn't say anybody was forcing me to do anything and instead I took issue with being lumped into the sweeping "this is the price we pay" assertion made by the comment to which I was replying.
I'm perfectly aware of what I can read. I wish blogs were a bit higher-standard, so I could enjoy them as well without the reservations that it requires.
EDIT: Okay, now that you've ninja-edited in a second paragraph, I'll respond to that too.
Even CNN is guilty of this. "This Just In" during Hurricane Sandy ran some Twitter troll's report of the NYSE flooding. Remember Ryan Lanza? Yep, "This Just In" as well. Half of the rest of the world sees the story on CNN.com and says, hey, that's a confirm, it aired on CNN! It's probably an associate producer manning the desk straight out of J-school, and that big "Publish" button is pretty God damned alluring.
Something about blogs, even under the CNN umbrella, seems to make facts a second-class citizen. "Breaking" doesn't mean the same thing that it did a couple decades ago, and integrity is crumbling with Internet journalism.
I don't think "blogs" deserve collective guilt for Gizmodo's sins any more than "the media" do. The vast majority of blogs acquitted themselves fine here. But wishing for better standards from "blogs" is like wishing "novels were a bit higher-standard." There are a lot of terrible novels in print (the majority even!), but you'd be foolish to blame the whole genre for the literary sins of "Fifty Shades of Grey."
That's a disingenuous distinction. By blogs I'm not saying the technical amalgamation of components that make a "web log", I'm saying the "typical news sources" that are cited on the Web these days. It's not about the genre, and you're oversimplifying my critique.
I'm perfectly aware of what I can read. I wish blogs were a bit higher-standard, so I could enjoy them as well without the reservations that it requires.
EDIT: Okay, now that you've ninja-edited in a second paragraph, I'll respond to that too.
Even CNN is guilty of this. "This Just In" during Hurricane Sandy ran some Twitter troll's report of the NYSE flooding. Remember Ryan Lanza? Yep, "This Just In" as well. Half of the rest of the world sees the story on CNN.com and says, hey, that's a confirm, it aired on CNN! It's probably an associate producer manning the desk straight out of J-school, and that big "Publish" button is pretty God damned alluring.
Something about blogs, even under the CNN umbrella, seems to make facts a second-class citizen. "Breaking" doesn't mean the same thing that it did a couple decades ago, and integrity is crumbling with Internet journalism.