I dispute that. I think you are falling for a bit of a caricature. Most of them *don’t* read it. Hazel Blears famous ‘nihiltic bloggers’ comments were based on a couple of Westminster village blogs and an aim to deliver a political mugging. The speech transcript was not available to bloggers until the anti-blog media line had been established (eventually I had to get my transcript from a newspaper by the back door).

Some political blogs do hostile pieces, but many are written by party members, where MPs could have influence on if they tried, and that the MSM and politicians themselves are as bad

>in general there is a huge deficit of understanding among national politicians about what is going on in the hyperlocal publishing scene – they are a long way behind the curve. When you show them good local sites like say lichfieldblog they love them, they just don’t know they are there yet.

Part of the answer to that is in the hands of the sites, and part of it is to have a high self-image – assuming that you are worth MPs etc talking to, then they will assume that you are too.

There is perhaps an opportunity for e.g., interviews to be cross-posted from political sites. If I want to, I can probably get interviews with most MPs.

It needs relationships first – appoint a local political blogger as your political correspondent, and expect them to write reports as well as opinions.

That is not a promise that everything I write is 100% accurate – I would not be so stupid as to suggest that! However, because I have control over the blog, if it does come to my notice that there is an error I can also go back and correct, and re-explain, any time I like.

Old model: a small number of people (let’s call them journalists) had the complex and expensive job of keeping us informed. We cared about quality because our choice was limited.

New model: it’s cheaper and easier to publish so many more people do it. Some stuff is rubbish, some stuff is good. The quantity means we do no have to worry so much about quality because if we don’t like one source we can find another. In fact, if we care about a subject we may actually evaluate and compare information from a number of sources (and get a better, more balanced view, often, than we might with the old model).

In the old model, we might rely on the same source (a newspaper, say) for all sorts of different information. In the new, we find the best source for the information we want. The quality comes from the breadth of sources.

The quality of output from an individual blogger is unimportant. What is vital is the audience has the tools it needs:

o Some way of searching through the volumes of information to find the good stuff (I believe there is a company called Google that offers something along these lines)

o Some sort of parallel system for discussing, criticising, debating (Twitter, Facebook, comments on the blogs themselves).

o A way to respond if we feel strongly (Blogger, WordPress, Twitter allow us to publish to a mass audience with no expertise and for free)

o A free and open society

o An understanding of how to search, cross-check and discriminate. But no-one needed to teach us how to read a newspaper. My guess is no-one will need to teach our children how to read blogs.

I come from B2B print press background, and it has been my experience that two magazines competing head to head both produce better journalism thanks to the competition. When one closes, the quality of the other generally goes down the pan.

Blogs create the ultimate in competition and there are already signs that pro journos are doing a better job because of the competition from enthusiastic amateurs.

If a piece about Online Journalism, I am more likely to trust one from say Paul Bradshaw, than from say Baroness Buscombe or the Akond of Swat.

On the other hand, at this point I have no reason to trust a piece from Paul Bradshaw on how to hold a catch and roast a wild boar in the German Countryside when all you have to hand are 2 matches, a packet of cornflakes, a tin opener, and a condom, than I would trust one written by Ray Mears.

Personal brand within each content niche matters, whatever the crowd says afterwards.

MPs are also coloured by only reading the poisonous bile of the mainstream political blogs – it is rare to find an MP with a feel for hyperlocal publishing like http://www.kingscrossenvironment.com or http://digbeth.org

‘objectivity’ is a dead end I have never really understood why journalists aim for this. The Independent is a good example of where that leads you. Yet politicians like it in a public service sense because the ‘balance’ criterion gives even the weirdest opposing position a right to speak. local blogs aren’t impartial – they are pro their area usually.

in general there is a huge deficit of understanding among national politicians about what is going on in the hyperlocal publishing scene – they are a long way behind the curve. When you show them good local sites like say lichfieldblog they love them, they just don’t know they are there yet. See the session as a way of educating them (albeit in words, perhaps with hand gestures and absolutley no internet).