As interviews get blogged, open-source journalism could take off

i was tempted to do that a bit Heather in my post this morning but decided not to.

http://avc.blogs.com/a_vc/2005/08/impact_media.html

I think Mark already did a pretty good job of writing another article about the article. I think his posting of the e-mail exchange offers readers an awful lot to think about, and adds a lot of value.

From his post, I found myself thinking about the interactiveness blogs can provide. When I read the Times article, I just took it as is - like, "oh I guess Mark has a mean corporate guy side". Not really a bad reflection, just like a tough guy big wig thing.

I was really surprised to see him question the article, and be all like, "WTF? When did I say that?"

I don't think I would call it "open source" journalism, but I do think it makes the world a little smaller. There are so many more ways to interact with people over the electronet than in 3-D. Just might make things more human and personable.

Heya Fred,

Yep, I was thinking about that when I saw your blog entry. This really is something to think about. It's funny because with bloggers that I speak with, I am starting to ask them not to blog about anything until after the story is published. And I think that's common because actually Steve Rubel of MicroPersuasion was the first to tell me he does it after a tiff with another blogger.

Steve-

Considering the extreme tortional forces applied to the news right now, what you suggest sets up like a carnival of spin. On the other hand, handled responsibly, publishing different points of view of the same event or events may help balance public debate. I think the key is to keep the professionals engaged so it's not all so much thinly veiled spam.

Pete Z.