Tom Griffin (London, OK): It was only to be expected that the blogosphere wouldn't take kindly to Hazel Blears' attack on it and so it has proved. Blears told the Hansard Society:
Mostly, political blogs are written by people with disdain for the political system and politicians, who see their function as unearthing scandals, conspiracies and perceived hypocrisy. "Until political blogging 'adds value' to our political culture, by allowing new voices, ideas and legitimate protest and challenge, and until the mainstream media reports politics in a calmer, more responsible manner, it will continue to fuel a culture of cynicism and despair.
That got short shrift from Guido Fawkes, who Blears accused of 'vicious nihilism':
Asking political bloggers to "add value" is to misunderstand the relationship between a free press and politicians. Take a memo Ms Blears, we are not here to "add value", or do what politicians want, Guido has his own values and aims to hit back at political hypocrisy and lies. Politicians make laws, so they should be held to account, to a higher standard. The Nick Robinsons, Peter Riddells, Michael Whites and Steve Richardsons of the world don't do investigative digging, they report back their impressions from their lunch meetings. They re-package and interpret spin from the party machines. That is how they "add value". They are what Peter Oborne memorably described as the "client media".
No doubt there is a lot to take issue with in Guido's output, but the answer surely is not to dismiss a growing medium, but to get involved in the online debate. Blears' emphasis on the oft-remarked right-wing dominance of the blogosphere ignores the efforts of those like Liberal Conspiracy who are trying to redress the balance.
Most significantly, it ignores the very different situation in America, something which James Graham noted when he said of Blears' speech:
This on the day that a black man called Barack Hussein Obama won the presidency of the USA with the largest popular mandate anyone has ever achieved in the history in the world, fuelled significantly off the back of social media - of which blogging played a large part.
The contrast between Obama and Blears underlines the fact that the rise of blogging is part of a wider generational shift of a kind that has often been driven by changes in information technology in the past. In the Seventeenth Century, Archbishop Laud railed against the radical pamphleteers who were undermining his vision of a monolithic centralised state. Blears' position looks all too similar.
