Blog/Bloggers - Necessary?

[John S. Rabi]

Hunter Bishop started his blog after he was fired to piss off Stephens Media, so there certainly was some vested personal interest there. [] However, as time went by his blog became a reputable source of information and he became the "Godfather of Bloggers" not to mention his current position! []

Aloha,
John S. Rabi, GM,ARB,BFT,CM,CBR,FHS,PB,RB
808.989.1314
http://www.JohnRabi.com
Typically Tropical Properties
"The Next Level of Service!"

[JerryCarr]

I greatly admire Hunter Bishop and was a frequent poster on his blog. Although I know he is glad to have his current job, I can't help but feel that we have lost a watchdog who fearlessly pointed out the foibles of our politicians. Do you think Mayor Kenoi was thinking of that just a little bit when he hired him?

Cheers,
Jerry

[Guest]

Sometimes I think that NEWS is 90% institutionalized gossip.

How I found this blog was it's Farm and garden section. I was wanting to see what folks were successfully growing in Puna, and found it via a Google search or a link from another Agri-blog.

Eventually I started to read the .A Puna forum and now I feel that I know some of y'all. Even though I know I am 180 degrees out of phase with the majority political view of most of you.

I have grown somewhat fond of folks here and have learned an immense amount of knowledge.

Thanks to all of you.

[Guest]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Menehune
I found my opinion was way TOO narrow...

Who oversees their content as to accuracy, lack of bias, etc...

I HAVE to embrace blogs/bloggers...

---

Question... MENEHUNE... Most of us who blog... have a NAME and stand behind what we say... and not by some "Screen Name"

If something we say on our blog is incorrect... we can be called on things both in public or on our blog.

If a MENEHUNE Spouts something off that is untrue... who do we call upon to correct that statement?

Damon Tucker

P.S. Who are you and how do I know your credible? Being anonymous on the internet is far less credible in my opinion then standing by your name and your beliefs.

Damon Tucker's Weblog

[centipede]

I prefer reading blogs, commentaries, and essays of those I disagree with. I already know my core beliefs and am not so arrogant as to think that just because I have a certain point of view, that's the way it has to be and I certainly don't need reinforcement in my beliefs by reading stuff I already agree with. There's always room for improvement as well as enlightenment and I can think of no better way of doing it than learning what the opposition thinks. As far as the cable news media goes, the big itch I have with them is how they keep headlining old news with the caption "Breaking News". Back in the day, that was reserved for new, shocking events and not rehashes of a new twist on stories that have been going on for days, weeks, or months.

[PaulW]

>And this is different from our own Hawaii Tribune Herald how?

What I said was in response to the claim that bloggers have no vested interest.
Newspapers do too (some more then others) but journalists are supposed to
declare any conflict of interest.

[Aaron S]

Menehune, do you know Noelani Whittington ? It seems you you do as it
appears you are defending her action in drafting that directive blackballing me, Damon Tucker, and David Corrigan.

The Kona Blog is my labor of love. I started it in 2005 because I felt constrained by the monthly limit imposed by the newspapers on how many letters to the editor you could write. On top of that, I was frustrated on how the Hokulia mess was playing out at the time.

My blog has become even more important outlet for information over the next three and half years. Especially since there is no alternative newspaper aside from the Stephens Media cabal.

As far as I my take on the DPW directive, I'm still pissed at Noelani
for what she did. It seems she wanted to control the flow of information to whom she choosed. In other words she wanted to eliminate any DPW accountability to the citizens of this island.


http://snipurl.com/dki5a (DPW directive)

Lastly Menehune, I use common sense when I blog, not some arcane directive on ethics. After all I'm not getting compensated for my time.

[mgeary]

I took Menehune's original post to be a lament, or at least a question, about the changing times we live in. Not wanting to speak for Menehune, here is my take: News and information is no longer limited to gumshoe reporters, either print or video, with a fedora. And a degree in journalism, and a circle of peers who drove each other by peer pressure to verify their sources and information.

Personally, I think the bloggers arose to fill a need, because the old school print and video journalists grew away from their own mission. They grew stagnant, and haughty and arrogant in believing that they had the corner on the news, or at least the "right" way to present the news, believing they were somehow "independent" or impartial. Nobody is without a point of view, and everybody is connected in some way.

Nowadays, pretty much anybody with an Internet connection, with or without a camera, can and does post a massive amount of information. Some of it is good, some of it is junk. Some of it is lop-sided diatribe, some of it is fair and balanced. Ahem.[] It is up to us, the consumer, to determine what we see and believe. That is the massive shift that has taken place...a shift in control away from being spoon-fed by three monolithic networks and a handful of print media to personal and independent ownership of news and information as a commodity. It's our news, dammit, and we're not gonna be straight-jacketed anymore.

The flip side of that is that I can now exclusively zoom in on Nazi skinhead weblogs, or we've-been-visited-by-alien weblogs, or whatever single point of view I've already adopted to re-inforce my beliefs. Not sure how that differs from exclusively watching MSNBC to get the left or FOX to get the right, other than maybe there are just more options.

It's a different world we live in from the one we grew up in, and bloggers and blogging are just one facet of that difference. Like esnap, I'm tremendously grateful for PunaWeb.

Aloha! ;-)

[PaulW]

>If something we say on our blog is incorrect... we can be called on things both in public or on our blog.
>If a MENEHUNE Spouts something off that is untrue... who do we call upon to correct that statement?

On the contrary, someone who chooses anonymity (and the choice is there for a reason) on a forum can be called to account for everything they say on that forum by the other members.

Bloggers, however, can simply delete any comments they don't like from their blogs.

[Bob Orts]

Bloggers can be any idiot who writes anything they want for whatever reason. It can be pure unadultured BS based 100% on their twisted opinion. It could have no insight and equally no socially redeeming value. It could be so bias as to render the words useless garbage and the message a ranting load of crap.

Bloggers can be anyone who writes anything they want for a specific reason. It can be factual based on a well crafted review of information with no personal opinion expressed. It could enlighten people with information they needs and provide people with true journalistic value. Their writings can be void of any bias and provide a piece worthy of a Pulitzer.

And as most often are, it could be a combination of both.

Blogs and bloggers have expanded our information base and have also curtailed our information base.

I have read just about everyone’s blog who linked it here. Some are good pieces of information that I read regularly because it informs and enlightens. The others are a worthless waste of space that doesn’t merit the time.

So Menehune, I can only offer the opinion of a respected judge as a guide, "….bloggers words are trustworthy when they employ trustworthy standards to their writings, and their words are untrustworthy opinions when they employ untrustworthy opinionated standards to their words. The individual reader has to decide."