How Bloggers Are Held Accountable

So, Greater Boston posted a "Mea Culpa" to their erroneous (and hilarious) report on the erroneous (and infuriating) New York Times report on the mega bucks we bloggers are pulling down in this new, ultra-lucrative world of political blogging. Good. My parents were relieved to discover that I actually do exist.

For all of the mistakes Greater Boston did fess up to, there was a major theme in their original panel on blogging that they did not address. Namely, like many other established media sources before them, they failed to retract the utterly false notion that there is no accountability in the blogosphere. We have all heard that idea repeated over and over and over again, even though it has about as much basis in reality as the notion that Scott, Matt, Jonathan and I were all actually Jerome. It makes about as much sense that an institution as large as the blogosphere has quickly emerged and continued to function without any internal checks and balances as it does to assume that Jerome was able to produce the full-time blogging load of three people and moonlight for Senator Menendez in addition to his other consulting work for Forward Together PAC. Both premises posit bloggers as inhuman in our capabilities, and are clearly based in about the same amount of anthropological knowledge of the blogosphere as 16th and 17th century Europeans utilized in their most phantasmagoric and otherwise absurd reports on the native peoples of the Americas, Africa, and large parts of Asia.

Anyone who has ever spent any degree of time as a prominent blogger knows full well that there are a lengthy and strict series of accountability norms and mechanisms that political bloggers must obey, or else be ostracized and face irrelevance. Here are just a few of the ways in which bloggers are held accountable:

  • New Content Accountability. If you want to be a big-time blogger, you have to produce new content at a torrid and relentless rate. Virtually every single highly trafficked political blog posts multiple new articles every day of every week, even on weekends and holidays. I often commiserate about this with Atrios and BooMan, since we are the only professional political bloggers in Philadelphia (I think). As Duncan once said to me "you have to feed the beast," even if it isn't always your best content. As BooMan wrote the other day:
    How about my critics try to find four stories a day to write about, and have them all be of critical importance and all really well written and thought out? Try doing it every day for almost two years? Then you can get my ear for criticisms of that type.
    This sounds like a defense mechanism, but it is not. This constant need for new, interesting content keeps bloggers accountable because it guarantees that only people who are unswervingly dedicated to blogging will be prominent bloggers at any point in time. It also prevents laziness, as you have to be at, or near, the top of your game all the time. If you are a one or two trick pony, it just won't work either. The endless demand for new material keeps your focused, dedicated, and open to new ideas.

  • Sourcing accountability. One thing prominent bloggers must do that is not required of television pundits or newspaper columnists is to provide a citation for every contentious claim, every direct quote, or every statistical assertion they make. Granted, the citation method of choice is through hyperlinks to source material, something that is not possible in any other media, but it is required of us none the less. If you make a claim that someone said something, and you either take the claim out of context or fail to provide a hyperlink to the source of the quote, then you will face immediate, negative repercussions from your readers and from other bloggers. Over the past two and a half years, I have suffered the wrath that results from lack of citation on a few occasions, and it is not pleasant. It usually forces me into immediate retractions, revisions and apologies. If you repeatedly make that mistake as a blogger, you will quickly lose a lot of credibility. Sourcing accountability is very real online in a way it just isn't (can't be?) for pundits on television, radio or most print periodicals.

  • Authenticity and transparency accountability. The New York Times article that claimed bloggers were shilling for candidates missed a vital aspect of the culture of the blogosphere: people online hate paid shills who do not reveal their funding sources. If any of those bloggers had not made it known beforehand that they were in fact being paid by a given politician, then that person would face long lasting, and severe, repercussions including a massive drop in their readership and incoming hyperlink bases. In fact, if you want to find one good way to destroy your reputation online, start writing about a candidate who is paying you without revealing that you are being paid by that candidate. All of the bloggers whose names I know on the list made said disclosures in a very public way. Too bad the New York Times didn't include those disclosures in their handy little chart.

    In a media environment saturated by political spin and manufactured talking points, if your blog lacks a sense of authenticity, and if people suspect you are just trumpeting talking points and not expressing how you actually feel about a given political situation, people will stop reading your blog. Period. Interestingly, I can't remember the last time a major pundit on television, radio or in newspapers disclosed all of their speaking fees, thereby letting their readers know who was funding them.

  • Small business accountability. Most top political blogs, especially on the progressive side, have gone well beyond the "hobbyist" level, and have become full-fledged small businesses. As such, the free market of the blogosphere functions as a form of accountability on political bloggers. It requires you to produce original content that can't be found anywhere else. It requires you to identify and refine your target audience, and to produce work that will appeal to that audience. It requires you to be innovative with your website design. It requires you to treat your audience with respect, and neither talk down to them nor post content they would find insulting. For example, on MyDD this means things like producing original on-site reporting from campaigns and long-form political analysis (content you can't get anywhere else), focusing on election strategy and political infrastructure (our market niche), and making sure our electoral forecasts are based in realty instead of our hopes and dreams.

    As a small business without any institutional support, the potential repercussions for failing to meet these demands are severe, to say the least. At MyDD, we lost 90% of our readership after the 2004 elections when my electoral forecasts were wrong. In 2006, I hit everything almost precisely on the nose, but even then we still never regained all of our pre-2004 audience. If I am wrong, people will stop reading me in favor of people who were right. I have no option but to be correct, unlike, say, David Brooks or other Meet the Press panelists on Iraq.
In short, there are many ways that the blogosphere is kept accountable, and all of them stem from our readers. Blogosphere regulars are the most intense consumers of news, most politically active, and highest educated demographic of any news media audience in the country. This means that if we prominent, "professional" bloggers don't constantly have new, good content for our readers that is accurate, properly sourced, presented in an interactive format, written from an earnest, authentic point of view that comes with no caveats, and is something in which they are interested that they can't find anywhere else, we won't be prominent bloggers for much longer. And on top of it all, we are cleaning our own apartments, paying our own bills, doing our own laundry, shopping for our own groceries, writing our own html, serving as our own prses secretaries, and picking up side jobs in order to make ends meet as we run these small businesses without any advertising or promotional budget. And if we fail at these tasks, we face irrelevance. I wonder how many wealthy, prominent national pundits can attest to all, or even most, of the requirements on those lists.

There is overwhelming accountability in the blogosphere, and if anyone were to live the life of a full-time blogger for even one week then s/he would know that. It just isn't the same sort of accountability traditional journalists working in established news operations have to face. Quite frankly, I think the accountability we face is far more severe. For example, in additions to the reasons I listed above, I have edited and fact checked all 2,700 stories I have produced over the past two and a half years. When I make errors it doesn't take until the next day for someone to point out those errors. It takes about fifteen minutes--and you better believe that keeps me on my toes. In our contemporary era of subjective news punditry, I would like to see anyone who has ever decried the lack of accountability in the political blogosphere live up to these standards before s/he starts talking about the need for another blogger ethics panel or other ways in which we must be held accountable. After all, if there is one ideological point on which everyone in the progressive, political blogosphere agrees, it is the need for a much more transparent and accountable government. We expect no less from other forms of media, and we expect no less of ourselves. Nor should we, because if the progressive movement is not held accountable to itself, ultimately we will fail to achieve all of our goals when it comes transforming government.

Display:


Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (3.00 / 1)

We are also just much more accountable to our community because readers can publicly participate in the same forum that we do (ie. comments).  That's a huge structural difference.  They can choose to take feedback seriously or not.  We have to take feedback seriously.


by Matt Stoller on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 03:12:35 PM EST

I'd add one more point (none / 0)

There is no inherent "stickiness" to blogs -- it's not like readers are locked in with paid subscriptions which are difficult to cancel.

It takes no time and no money to read a new blog, and less than a minute to become a member with posting privileges -- again, without having to pay for the ability.   And on the other hand, if everyone here just decided to leave, they could in a blink -- even organizing the boycott on this very site.


by Adam B on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 03:34:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (3.00 / 1)

To point out the obvious, many mainstream media outlets have proven that they can't handle the level of accountability required of bloggers: notice the many stories about the Washington Post pulling comments on stories (etc) because they couldn't handle the by-and-large polite questioning of sources and biases.  And there have been other stories about various newspapers who couldn't really handle comments from interested readers . . .


by Maven on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 03:20:43 PM EST

Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (none / 0)

great point. I'd say that between hyperlinking sources, and the instant-ombudsman power of open commenting. I asked a real reporter and columnist (addressing an audience of bloggers in an incredibly dismissive and condescending manner) if he felt that open comments and hyperlinking sources could provide bloggers a sort of distributed fact-checking service.

He dodged the question in about four different ways before telling the audience that the only answer was for them to hire editors and fact-checkers. right.


Progress is Personal | PCCC
by msnook on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 05:44:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Market Accountability (3.00 / 1)

To be fair to the journalists what they think of as accountability is not present on the blogosphere, institutional accountability. Your boss kicks your ass. Not that it really happens in journalism but they like to pretend it does.

Market Accountability is what the blogosphere is all about. You screw up or you slow down your blogs dies quickly. That's how the market works.

But then, journalists haven't actually competed in a market in 60 years.


by MNPundit on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 03:46:26 PM EST

Re: Market Accountability (none / 0)

Not just "bosses", but colleagues.  When Jayson Blair went down, it brought a lot of people down with him.  There (ought to be)/(is) significant internal pressure to perform journalism ethically.


by Adam B on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 03:57:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Market Accountability (none / 0)

market accountability is suspect, imo.

i hope blogs can be founded on a better principle than "is it selling?" even if "is it selling?" does create an inherent standard of accountability.


by Stewieeeee on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 04:08:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ah but look who they sell to! (none / 0)

Right now most bloggers don't sell to advertisers or corporate bosses... they sell to us.

Their readers.

And because we're liberals we have good taste ;)


by MNPundit on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 07:34:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Perspective (none / 0)

I'm glad you're making a spirited defense of blogging, but this matters not a whit to traditional media.  Traditional journalists view the blogosphere the same way necons view the Middle East.


TAKE BACK OUR PARTY: Democracy Bonds
by LiberalFromPA on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 04:02:06 PM EST

Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (none / 0)

Awesome post Chris.


-Tracy Joan

Tomorrow Begins Today! John Edwards for President!
by Tracy Joan on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 04:07:59 PM EST

Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (3.00 / 1)

So who still watches tv news or reads the paper and why?


by Lucas O'Connor on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 04:32:03 PM EST

Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (3.00 / 1)

There are hundreds of stories that run in newspapers that don't make it to the blogs.  And not necessarily because they aren't important.  If you're not reading the papers there will be huge holes in your brain where various streams of information not properly covered by independant media on the internet should be.

The key is to be an active or skeptical reader of newspapers, the same way you are of blogs.  Newspapers are systemically different forms of information collecting/sharing than blogs are, and I think they're both currently invaluable.  On what would the bloggers comment on, what would they filter and analyze, if not for the hated mainstream media?  As for the opposite scenario, we've seen how shit the media is without being held accountable by blogs and the like, right?

Television, I won't defend.  Television news is a heap of shit.


"I, even I know the solution: love, music, wine and revolution" -The Magnetic Fields
by CranesAreFlying on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 10:06:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (3.00 / 2)

The Beat the Press taped segment ended with "OK, truce. Bloggers are credible, and we are credible." That's the exact opposite of the lesson they should have learned. No institution is inherently credible. "Bloggers" aren't credible. Chris is credible, in that I know where he is coming from. Same with Matt, Jonathan, and all the other Jerome avatars out there. And Markos, and Duncan, etc, etc. The NYTimes has some institutional credibility, but I still read their stuff critically. I know when Adam Nagourney is writing stuff that's pure RNC/Bush spin, for example. And I treat their OpEd page no differently than any blog I have familiarity with.

Thinking like BTP is stuck in a previous era when a consumer of information had limited access to alternative sources. Critical reading wasn't nearly as possible then. I don't trust any media outlet implicitly (even MyDD, believe it or not!). And in today's media environment, I don't have to. That's the secret to "blogger accountability" that a previous generation of information providers just doesn't get.


by BriVT on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 04:41:16 PM EST

Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (none / 0)


Excellent post.

As to accountability, the demand for such is a tad over done.  But more to my point, I like your interpretation of the "unassailable" facts relative to your niche market. Your writing is exemplary and its "reach" should not be under-estimated and it is well-received here in the Sonoran Desert.  Needless to say but I will, writing is hard work and always much-appreciated, especially when the conservative media in my neck of the woods intentionally does omit important facts.

Keep up the good work!


by Jaango on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 04:57:37 PM EST

Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (none / 0)

OK can you tell me how i can pull down these big bucks with my blog?


by orin76 on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 05:15:14 PM EST

Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (none / 0)

Great post. Also, professional bloggers increase the readers' political savey. This place is an elevator taking us higher into the realm of a more perfect union. Also, sharing knowledge bonds us in that shared knowledge. Notice, anyone, that there are certain of our leaders who read blogs? It's like hearing your group's slang coming from a different profession or on a TV situation comedy. It's a wha? moment.

Al Gore reads Buzzflash, among others, and probably this one too. Joe Wilson pops up on firedoglake some Sundays.

Everything is getting better than it was in 2002.


by mrobinsong on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 06:01:35 PM EST

Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (none / 0)

Damn straight! This junk ain't easy, vato!!! Way ta kick it.


Dust in the wind. All we are is dust in the divine, flatulent wind.
by Nezua Limon Xoloquinta Jonez on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 06:05:49 PM EST

Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (none / 0)

Chris, you should write a book.  Seriously.  Good stuff.


by Laurin from SC on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 06:26:49 PM EST

Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (none / 0)

That's a great post! I tend to agree that, in place of institutional accountability, bloggers experience a distributed market accountability.

I'm a bit curious about the statement that: "Most top political blogs, especially on the progressive side, have gone well beyond the "hobbyist" level, and have become full-fledged small businesses." Aren't conservative blogs, with their usual free-enterprise ideology, equally or more entrepreneurial than liberal blogs? Are there differences between conservative and liberal bloggers in the choices they make regarding ads vs. sponsorships?

I agree that it's really important to be up-front about sponsorships. Ads are usually pretty obvious. A blog-buddy of mine [we certainly don't always agree!] has just accepted a sponsorship. He's always thought for himself, and that's what counts.

I might add one thing about the ethics of covering business-related stories [or campaigns]. Often, one must link to a business or corporate site in order to provide the sourcing. There's no endosement or sponsorship present, but one is linking to a particular company rather than its competitors.

I think this necessity for occasional corporate or campaign citation sourcing may one of the reasons bloggers are strongly accountable to reveal their support, if any.

I think the accountability may be stricter in the political arena because it's more prone to name-calling and unsubstantiated claims.


by wesupportlee on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 09:05:45 PM EST

Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (none / 0)

Chris Bowers may exist; then again, Chris Bowers may not exist. Posting a comment to Chris Bowers may be, atheistically, not so unlike George Bush praying to God.  Bush has implied that God replies to him. How different is a Chris Bowers Cyberspace reply to a comment into Cyberspace?

There seems force of argument that Jerome could not produce the work of 4 persons, assuming a widespread appreciation of the volume of work published under all four names.  These judgments, that an individual has written words published under his name, are not so easy.  Among persons of only moderate sophistication, society accustoms us to practices where one person's work is presented as another's. I believe that Lincoln authored the Gettysburg Address and his first and second inaugurals truly and fully in a manner that George Bush has not authored any inaugural address or major speech of any note.  I would not believe that George Bush has taken pen to paper for any of the hundreds of signing memorandums by which the words enacted by Congress are disclaimed in the name of the Office of President.  Judges have clerks who provide words for the judge to adopt in many instances.  Corporate presidents have assistants to put words to paper. The modern autobiography has come some distance from Grant's memoirs, and the practice of a ghost writer is not limited to sports stars. Jerome employing 4 persons to produce writing published under his name versus Jerome publishing under 4 names: knowing the difference seems to require a personal acquaintance usually separate and apart from the blogging experience. Jerome, posting as Scott, even allowed that he used paid actors at yearly Kos; albeit, he didn't say he paid much.

So, "Does Chris Bowers exist?" becomes central to holding the blogosphere accountable. But "Accountability" is a tricky question.  Was Ken Lay held accountable for Enron? For what is Saddam Hussein being held accountable? Will George Bush be held accountable for his actions? (Do we ask for him forgiveness, he knows not what he does?) Are only individuals accountable?  Is there no group accountability?  Is the american blogger who has vocally opposed each and every step of the Bush Iraqi venture while enjoying otherwise the rights and benefits of living in these United States free from any accounting for debts or trespasses committed in Iraq?  Was such a blogger in 2003--referred to in some major media of which I have lost track as a "Cassandra"--seemingly ostracized and irrelevant in 2003 being held accountable then? Perhaps Chris Bowers's existence is not as central to blogosphere accountability, or maybe it is accountability is less central to Chris Bowers's existence.

Chris Bowers: accountable. Not so much.  In its place: Chris Bowers: popular blogger; in the right place at the right time. Not some nameless ronin, but one of the 40 faithful retainers who shout their name when taking the heads of Tom Delay and 29 other members of the dishonorable opposing clan.  In an inner dialogue, a behavior Chris Bowers has abandoned and forsaken, I imagine a scene in 2009 with Josh Marshall at TPM muckraker wistfully reminiscing: "now 2006, that was a target rich year! It just hasn't been the same since Pelosi became Speaker. Who would have seen how much we need the Warren Reports to bring in our traffic." At any rate, it won't remain 2006.

For now, right now, Chris Bowers provides content that is not Jerome.  Chris Bowers likes numbers.  It is such a breath of fresh air for someone to talk of numbers.  Jerome, even if he gets to blog from Paris from time to time, does not talk of numbers the same way.  George Bush can have Karl, who claims "the Math", but we are armed with numbers from Chris. There does not appear any accountability other than the extent that Chris holds himself accountable. He maintains his own samurai blogger ethic.

In return, I read Chris Bowers's posts.  I offer: I believe in Chris Bowers. I ask no further proof.  No burning bush. No parting of the waters. I will go forward on faith alone.


by wind off the lake on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:13:49 PM EST

Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (none / 0)

Geez, I didn't know you guys made any money so to speak of.  I always thought of it as trying to pay the cable and electric bill and eating kind of thing until you get a book in or some side jobs and pundit gigs.  sorta like if you were a writer - freelance and still waiting for the break and big bucks.


by vwcat on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:23:49 PM EST

Re: How Bloggers Are Held Accountable (none / 0)

the reason I read the blogs that I read is becouse of the blogs unrelenting persuit of the truth and whats best for ALL americans .no your not perfect,but you dont knowingly mislead people,and you dont alow others to mislead people,in other words I dont have to wear hip waders to walk through a page full of bullshit.I know that you dont print the truth for money,you do it becouse its part of your moral being to do so.thank you and keep up the good work.


by idahojim on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 08:59:09 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.