On February 12 Pew Research compared what MSM spent its time on last week vs the blogosphere. The differences were stark. We report and discuss 2 different worlds...
Reported Pew (graphics below page break):
Social media took on a host of controversial issues last week, from abortion to gay rights to health care reform. The online community gave the hot-button topics not only more attention than the mainstream press, but also much more opinionated intensity.
The most discussed subject on blogs was an anti-abortion television commercial featuring college football star Tim Tebow. Specifically, bloggers linked to the Feb. 2 Washington Post column by sportswriter Sally Jenkins, who is admittedly pro-choice, but who voiced support for Tebow and opposition to a number of women's groups who had been critical of his political stance.
From Feb. 1-5, fully 28% of the news links on blogs were about Jenkins' column, according to the New Media Index produced by the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism. Almost all of the bloggers who linked to the story supported her view.
The same topic did not generate much interest in the mainstream press last week. While a few sportswriters and political pundits touched on the issue, it was not among the top 10 subjects covered in the traditional press....
This is fascinating. Is it a sign of MSM's disconnect from the real concerns of flyover country? Or just a display of the difference in mediums, ours being more opinion/debate driven? Does it point out MSM's agenda - or blind spots? Or is it just that the blogosphere is more viscerally driven?
I don't know. I'm not a student of this topic.
But one thing I do know is this demonstrates the importance of pro-life blogging. If we weren't all talking about the Life issue, it wouldn't get any of the oxygen in the journalistic room.
