Docu-Blog Steve posted the other day about a New Yorker opinion piece by the dean of Columbia University’s journalism school, Nicholas Lemann, who takes aim at bloggers in “Amateur Hour: Journalism Without Journalists.”

I’ll admit that Lemann’s piece was long-winded for me; I prefer Steve’s summary, so I guess that’s a point for Lemann. But I have a couple of observations.

1. Why does the conversation, his as well as Steve’s seem to revolve around current events reporting, like politics? I don’t know about Lemann, but my NY Times has sections on real estate, job hunting, food, arts and entertainment, cars, finance, pretty much anything people are into is covered. Why does Lemann argue, even in this age of information overload, that reporters know more than people who work in the field (lots of blogs I read are by people blogging about things they are very familiar with)? I’m not saying that reporters necessarily know less, but I have seen a number of articles on topics I know a lot about covered in the paper, and the coverage has felt thin and even misrepresentative. Of course, there are reporters who know a lot more than I about my field, but I’ve never claimed that my blog will give you the insight that, for example, Anne Thompson’s will. Aren’t we capable of judging to what depth the writer knows about what they are writing?

2. Why aren’t we talking about the work that news media is NOT doing? “Echo chamber” is a term not only being used by my buddy Kent Bye - it seems an accepted fact that news media no longer investigates stories, uncovers news, but rather takes its feeds from press releases of companies, government, and other news outlets and then simply reads them as ‘news.’ Why this is is complex and debatable, but is it contested? How can we rely on news media that aren’t doing their job? Would there be a proliferation of blogs on news, politics, etc. if they were doing their job? I watched All the President’s Men recently and was astounded how far journalism has fallen; it doesn’t seem a stretch to say that if Watergate happened today, it wouldn’t be uncovered and/or reported. Not that journalists today don’t have their hearts in the right place, but I think they can’t see the forest for the trees.

3. I’m always leary of people who claim that citizens are nothing but uninformed masses and that they should leave [fill in the blank] to the professionals. A quick tour of Flickr has proven to me many times over that one need not be a professional photographer to take stunning, salable photographs. Being a ‘professional’ doesn’t make you the best, the most proficient, or even the most knowledgable about any given subject. I live my life with the idea that everyone knows more than me about something - that thought helps me to be respectful of others when my first impressions or snap judgements start to get the better of me, but I also believe to my core that it is true.

So, if we give Lemann the benefit of the doubt and assume he has a modicum of respect for his fellow citizens, why the lashing? If, as Docu-Blog Steve suggests, Lemann’s interest in disparaging bloggers is to counter any ideas students might have that they need not go to J-school, why does he have to use such a back-handed approach? Admit that there are some fantastic bloggers out there and teach his students critical thinking - how to evaluate the material, how to use it in traditional reporting, how to push the boundaries of his profession and allow it to change for the better. If he found/trained the next Woodward and Bernstein to turn this craziness called nightly news around, wouldn’t that be something we would all appreciate? I would, at least.

My good friend Erica is entering journalism school at Columbia this fall. She is smart, witty and talented woman who will undoubtedly get a lot out of her program. She’ll take from it what she needs to be successful and leave the rest, just like readers of this and any other blog.