Rereke Whakaaro wrote:
Of course Rupert will claim that you only find balanced reporting in the traditional media - blah, blah.
What all of these people fail to understand is the wisdom of crowds, and the interactive nature of news and comment that the web provides.
News and analysis on the web may, or may not, be good journalism - good sites get traffic, bad sites do not - good sites succeed, bad sites fail. That is natures way.
But real understanding on any story emerges, not so much due to the authors efforts, but in the in the comments section where you often get interesting analysis that the original author had not considered.
The interactive nature of news and opinion on the web is the gold of the new age. And I am so sorry, but letters to the Editor does not cut it.
It is pretty hard to hold an editorial position when your readers are typing BULLSHIT in capital letters.
It is interesting that, relative to our hit rate, we possibly have one of the lowest proportion of comments. I am not sure whether it is the forum format which puts off casual commenters, or perhaps there is some intangible. However, I regard myself as fortunate in having some extremely high quality and informative commemts, some of which have provided new leads and directions for the blog. And you are totally right about it being a corrective. I rely on the forum to tell me whne I've got things wrong or are going off the rails.