Legendary KELO-TV anchor emeritus Steve Hemmingsen has posted an interesting piece today about the effect of blogs on the Daschle v. Thune race. Excerpt:
I don't know how you prove this or if it can be proven at all given the ethereal nature of this whole cyberspace thing, but I suspect that these bloggers are the ultramodern form of talk radio. I also suspect they had a lot of clout in this last election from Bush to Thune.
I think people are slowly beginning to grasp the significant role of the blogs in the Senate race. As DVT notes, there are those MSM types who are embracing the blogs, and those fighting a pitched battle against the blogs. DVT notes, too, that those fighting against the blogs are the ones who have made up facts and resorted to such histrionics as playing the Hitler card.
Hemmingsen suggests later in his piece that "What we need is more bloggers to keep the bloggers honest." I completely agree. I heartily subscribe to the First Amendment ideal that the more speech there is, the better off all of us are. I'm glad to see at least one person in the local MSM agrees. It has been amazing to me how many local establishment types who should know better seem to think more speech is somehow a bad thing. For example, last week, Bob Burns, a professor at South Dakota State University, said on KSFY television that he thought blogs were "bad for politics."
As DVT notes, perhaps Hemmingsen's venture into discussing the Dakota Blog Alliance will prompt wider debate about the quality and balance of all South Dakota media. That debate, it seems to me, is sorely needed.
Recent Comments