Sunday, 5 October 2008

Should Bloggers be believed?

My posting is inspired by Rocky's post "Hail the King" Oct 4

Part of Rocky's post was about the credibility of what's being blogged, and whether or not bloggers who have been paid have less credibility etc.

In my opinion, the issue of credibility affects not only bloggers but
- all that's being broadcast
- all that's being published
- all that's being promised in elections

- all that's being said in religious places etc

The question of credibility lies NOT just with the blog/media/medium but with the Reader, the watcher, the listener.

I would like to think most of us have a healthy dose of common sense so as not to swallow a story - hook, line & sinker

And ofcourse then again, you ask me surely this depends on who the blogger/ media /personality is, right?

Well. How many influential bloggers are out there - who are so powerful that you would simply believe everything they write?

Much as some would like to flatter RPK & paint him as that MASTER BLOGGERGOD - which is why they believe he is such a threat, I betcha there are MANY who does NOT agree with him all the time.

In fact I know MANY who disagree strongly with what he writes, but yet they support him GASP!! ain't it?

Then there is the HUGE issue of whether bloggers should have less credibility because they have hidden agendas & motivation

Let's face it. All Bloggers are motivated by something - which is why we blog - Duh!

Whether it be Ego, Power, Money or simply a wish to express ourselves, we are motivated by something.

So it follows that therefore ALL of us have an "Agenda". But then, so what?

Are bloggers less credible if they have an agenda?
Are bloggers less credible if they are being paid?

Hey! Journos are being paid. Larry King's being paid. Oprah's being paid. Does this mean they have no objectivity if they are being paid?

And yes Oprah's endorsing Obama but I hardly think Obama's paying her for that. Does that mean she's more or less credible now?

So - in my books - so long as one is still allowed to be objective - I strongly feel that even paid bloggers (should they be so lucky) can be as credible as the poor unpaid blogger.

Caveat Emptor - even for blogs with no visible ads

If you smell a rat, think you see a rat, it is probably a Rat

Again there is no reason to believe something MORE just cause you see no ads because hey Bro! Ain't nobody's gonna tell you they are being paid by someone to write propaganda, are they?

Yeah. We ain't just some stupid syncophants.

So the right to read, to believe or not, to discern or not - is still the perogative of the reader

Having said all that mouthful of bs, I would say ultimately I believe in
The Right to Write
The Right to Blog

Whether or not someone is socially or morally responsible is not my pasal. They have to answer to their God, their Government & their conscience. Not to me.

Even if I totally disagree with views of rabid extreme Right Umno-nites, I would still fight claws&all for their Right to Express themselves

And yeah. Anybody stupid enough to want to sponsor me, say something. I CAN BE BOUGHT! ye..eaah!

1 comment:

Crankster said...

Yes, I disagree very often with what RPK says, but I still support him.