Constrasting Mark Knoller’s Tweet Coverage Of Obama’s Church Speech With Mine (Unpaid Twitterer Citizen Journalist)

Today, President Obama spoke at a D.C. area church to honor Martin Luther King Day. Gateway Pundit has the video. You can see my Twitter feed for the notable quotes, etc.

Here are some differences:

1. I admit my bias. Mark Knoller does not.

Anyone reading my coverage knows that I’m an out and proud conservative-libertarian. People read my stuff with that in mind.

That is not to say that Mark Knoller is unbiased. He just doesn’t admit it. For example, if you followed his coverage, you’d get a sweeping overview that would lead one to believe that the President’s speech was exclusively honoring Martin Luther King. You wouldn’t get the quotes about progress for gays and lesbians or the politicized comments about health care reform.

It was a political speech in a church, not a soaring ideals speech. You wouldn’t know that from Mark Knoller’s coverage. It’s what Knoller left out that demonstrates bias. This is a much more insidious form of bias because people don’t know what they’re missing.

2. I link to competing news sources. Mark Knoller does not.

For example, Knoller’s network was not covering the speech live. MSNBC online did cover the speech live.

So I linked to the coverage so people could watch, and discern, for themselves.

Those following Knoller’s feed would have to take his word for it. That’s too bad. On Twitter, a person can follow all network feed while watching another network video live coverage in another window. It’s not really competition at all. It is also incomplete news.

3. I link to “competing” Tweeters. Mark Knoller does not.

Well, I don’t view them as competition. I view them as different points of view. Period. People can take what they want from them.

So, I Retweet Knoller or Matt Lewis or Philip Klein or Jake Tapper or Mary Katherine Hamm or Matt Drache or Steve Green or any other news source who is offering information about the subject. That includes lots of people you haven’t heard of, but who I follow on Twitter. I retweet regular people and give their opinion the same weight as Mark Knoller. If he or she says something worthwhile, why does it matter WHO says it?

Mark Knoller’s feed is all Knoller all the time. It’s just limited, is all.

It is great that Mark Knoller is on Twitter. I like his Twitter feed. I have, however, noted more than once what he’s omitted salient information.

Following Major Garrett and Jake Tapper often fills in the blanks and leaves me wondering about subtle bias. On Twitter, bias is revealed rather easily. When multiple sources live-report an event an observer can see them.

Twitter is the great equalizer.

What does this mean for the future of news aggregation and assimilation? I don’t know.

I have linked to local people with webcams and big orgs like MSNBC. I have linked to heavily compensated pundits and average citizens like me who are especially insightful (or stupid–and I don’t mean just the citizens).

The media world is flattening. Between YouTube and U-Stream, Blogging, Twitter and other outlets, news and entertainment are becoming more merit-based.

There will always be room for a guy like Jake Tapper or Andrew Malcolm who are adapting to the new media forms. People will pay them for their content either under a big brand or on their own. They are safe.

Well, they’re as safe as anyone is in this morphing economy and accelerating technology.

Posted in Bias