Blog jam

The sparks struck from conversations at last week's ConvergeSouth gathering in Greensboro continue to ignite small fires throughout the blogosphere. One of the subjects that has burned hottest is the notion that some closely-held values of journalism may have to change as a result of the Internet.

Suggest that to a traditional journalist and he or she quickly jumps to the conclusion that you're saying that accuracy, objectivity and fairness no longer have a place in what we do.

To whom I say, respectfully: Get a grip, people! It should be self-evident that true information is always going to be more useful than false information, and that there are always going to be folks who want to know more than one side of important issues.

I think it's a good thing that people have started to talk about how old values apply to the new media and how new values may be required to fit the very different ethic and the very different audience of the Internet.

It's great fun to listen to the debate. For example, take a look at what happened when Ted Vaden, public editor of The News & Observer in Raleigh, N.C., wrote about the issue in his online blog. N&O Executive Editor Melanie Sill rose up in high dudgeon, particularly over a comment by press critic Jay Rosen of PressThink, who was quoted as saying that journalists are "used to being the filter from God, but people don't accept that anymore."

Wrote Sill:

Heavens. Perhaps Rosen has spent too much time peering at journalism through the lens of his computer screen ... He ought to be at the tail end of a 12-hour day with an assistant city editor at any newspaper, editing stories on deadline and trying to make them clear and cogent.

As bloggers respond to her comments, there is both heat and light. You'll decide for yourself which is which.