The mainstream media reported the President's satellite rehearsals.
This is an "Uh, the main stream media got it"-message.
Apparently, despite the President's efforts to show and tell a staged video teleconference, the satellite feeds showed military personnel reviewing likely questions and answers with the troops.
The news: Fox covered the issue and stated that people watching the live satellite feed before the President showed up, witnessed the preparation. Fox specifically referenced individuals outside the military who were simply watching the satellite feed.
Fox didn't simply say that the President had a teleconference; rather, Fox covered the larger issue: That not only did it appear as though the teleconference was staged, but that there were satellite feeds showing there were rehearsals, and that Fox was aware of people who had access and watched these rehearsals.
I'm all for calling the Main Stream Media what it is: Something that is different than the internet.
But if people truly believe that the "main stream media" is irrelevant, then there's no need to consider what Fox is or isn't saying about the live satellite feeds; or the people who have witnessed these rehearsals.
I can think of no other way to quickly disseminate news to a broad audience that, self-evidently, using broadcast media.
Broadband may have gotten a bad rap because "it's not the internet." The trick will be to simply take the best and do what the internet does, but better.
How will they do that? That's up to the broadband.
The problem the blogosphere currently has is that it consistently has gotten into the bad habit of dismissing the main stream media.
Bluntly, the whine and chorus of, "Oh, they'll never listen," has become so entrenched, that the blogosphere and narrow band has played victim, but didn't plan for "what happens when the broadband does what the internet does, but better."
The blogosphere is good at using the blogosphere; but it isn't good at being ready the day that the main stream media shows up, with questions in hand, and are asked, "OK, you've got our attention; what do you think needs to be done?"
The blogosphere is locked on the abuses of the past; but hasn't credibly demonstrated it, as a blogosphere, can as quickly as the mainstream, collate ideas, affect a wide audience, and then implement quick solutions.
Sure, the blogosphere was there with the Tsunami and Katrina. But the blogosphere wasn't physically on the ground, providing relief. Real people, disconnected from the internet, without power, were the ones that continue to "make it happen."
The day the blogosphere embraces the main stream media as an ally, will be the day when tea blogosphere gets over its "woe is me," attitude, and realizes that it's not the medium, nor the links that make the difference.
It's the content, and improvements.
The chances of finding "valuable content" on the internet are high; but there's also a growing chance you heard about that valuable content from the main stream media.
As far as the "supreme eminence" of the blogosphere, I'm not convinced. My experience shows that they can't be bothered unless they "feel like it."
If there's a problem, I've found that many will self-promote their "connections" to no end, but then when someone might believe their connections and influence are real, suddenly it becomes too difficult to address the issue or take action.
Am I a convert to the main stream media? Of course not: I haven't seen anything to justify changing my personal opinion; and that opinion still is equally applied to the blogosphere and also Washington or elsewhere.
The problem the blogosphere and "alternative media" have is that they've rested on their laurels too long.
All this time, they've gotten away with, in the wake of the 9-11 and impeachment-related non-sense, to sit there and say, "Hey, you can't trust anyone else."
The problem the blogosphere has had, given this "special public respect" when the main stream media was too afraid to speak, was that the alternative media took it personally when the blogosphere critiqued their content, lack of responsiveness with the same vigor the blogosphere applied to the main stream media.
The blogosphere has demonstrated that it isn't "more capable" in addressing simple issues; nor are the particular participants in a position to provide superior service, or generate on their own a broad program or set of responses to surprising situations.
Indeed, the blogosphere's strength has been its independence. But that independence fails when the surprises overwhelm their narrow resources. The main stream media, with its far larger staffs, can devote a chunk of manpower to a particular issue, if that's what's needed.
The narrow internet, the individual players, can't keep up, nor can they collectively organized themselves to quickly delegate and manage research plans to provide timely information.
Some have attempted technical solutions to this "delegation problem" in the internet.
I shall not attempt to balance the benefits of the main stream management approach versus technical possibilities of blogosphere delegation.
But I do know we can only use what we have: And that is the main stream media's existing management system which can and does make decisions.
The internet doesn't have that organizing capability.
Well, now that the public is finally listening to both the internet and the blogosphere, what now?
The blogosphere and mainstream media have melded into one.
Consider this a, "OK, time's up. You've all had your honeymoon. I shall now continue to evaluate the content not based on simply the source, but in how the information is provided, it's credibility, and whether the source of that information is responsive to simple requests."
As it always has been.
If you would like the public to believe you are a "big shot" replacement for the main stream media, then you need to demonstrate results.
If you're "too busy" to do better than the main stream media, I'm "too busy" to believe you're a suitable alternative.
Congratulations, we're now at a level playing field.
Your honey moons are over.
The scale is tilting away from the blogosphere.
You have far exceeded what the public should reasonably put up with in terms of your arrogance.
Time to go feed your horses.
Oh, I'd give you a link. But, I didn't hear about this on the internet.
Fox News: Fair, and balanced.
Finally, I got it.
Maybe the blogosphere will start to do the same.
I'm not holding my breath.