Making comparisons between the output of old media journalists (such as me) and bloggers (such as me, I suppose) is a risky business. Anyone who does so, from either side, is prone to get his head bitten off by people from the other.

But my eye has been caught by the coincidence of views on the topic between Bill Keller, executive editor of the New York Times and Nick Denton, proprietor of the blog outfit Gawker Media and my former Financial Times colleague and book co-author.

In his Hugo Young memorial lecture, delivered at Chatham House in London last week, Mr Keller said that he was, in some ways, a convert to blogs:

But most of the blog world does not even attempt to report. It recycles. It riffs on the news. That’s not bad. It’s just not enough. Not nearly enough.

Now consider the advertisement on Friday on Gawker for a new managing editor (several of its employees are leaving at once, saying they are tired and disillusioned):

It’s no longer enough to take stories from the New York Times, and add a dash of snark. Gawker needs to break and develop more stories. And the new managing editor will need to hire and manage reporters, as well as bloggers . . . Think of Gawker less as a blog than as a full-blown news site. The right candidate will oversee Gawker’s evolution.

If they seem to be saying the same thing, that is not surprising. The boundary between old media and new is falling and the distinction between blogs and print publications is eroding. There will always be a large population of blogs that are observations by individuals for themselves and their friends. But there is a growing segment of professional online publications.

As traditional outlets including the FT gear up with blogs, online publishers such as Gawker are investing in more original reporting. I imagine the two sides will eventually meet in the middle, even if it is not clear where the meeting-point will be.

December 4, 2007 3:30am in Media | Comment