Scruggs case and the debate reporters vs. bloggers
When someone decides to make a post on their blog they write it, maybe they read it and then put it on-line. There are no copy editor’s to revise posts, no editor to decide the newsworthiness of a story, and it tends to be very subjective. A fact Rossmiller or Freeland admits to. News is supposed to influence public perception, but through reporting the facts and letting readers decide what they think. In my opinion blogs influenced people against Scruggs well before all the facts of the case came to light, whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Because bloggers have nobody to answer to, getting news on the page can go much quicker. When it came to Scruggs news most stories were only mild updates discussing the latest motion in U.S. v. Scruggs. News only a select few in Mississippi really cared about. Yet when new motions were filed, and evidence released I know Scruggs reporters were sifting through the new information as fast as possible trying to figure out the general gist of the new information. We would be looking for quotes involving sweet potatoes, bodies buried, and other such incriminating news. Then we have to write the story, get it edited, and wait for the on-line guy to post it on the website (or wait to till 5 a.m. for the paper to get delivered).
While many people read the blogs and go to them first for Scruggs news, most people in Oxford simply didn’t care that much to go find the news on-line. People love picking up the paper and seeing all the different news as part of their day starter. Folks drinking a cup of coffee and reading the Daily Mississippian is a common place on the Oxford Square And students grab the paper so they have something to read while the teacher sets up for class.
Paul Quinn Blog
6/23/8
Magnolia Tribune
