The Link has a profile of Rover, the independent online arts magazine which includes pieces from some well-known local freelance writers whose launch party was last week but has been around for a bit.
It includes a dig at bloggers as amateur journalists who don’t know what they’re talking about. I get the point about professional vs. amateur journalism, but I think the generalization of bloggers is a bit unfair.
At the risk of offending a former editor in chief (wink), I have issues The Link writers accusing anyone of being amateurs. Not to imply that all Link journalists are amateurs… that generalization is a bit unfair. =)
And where does the difference begin actually ? Have you seen the jokes that parade as journalism in “real” papers or news outlets at large? Outright reprints of press releases, rehashes from other papers and loads and loads of puff pieces. So again I ask, where does amateur end and pro begin? And how do we define them?
To be fair, it wasn’t the Link saying that bloggers are amateurs, but the editor of the magazine.
Ohhhh. Well that should have been made clearer in the text above. How amaturish…!
(I kid because I love.)