It seems like everytime a new study comes out that says something quite amazing about blogs, it is downplayed. This Reuters article says that, "Charting the discussion of issues during the 2004 presidential campaign, the study by the Pew Internet & American Life Project and consultants BuzzMetrics found political blogs -- online opinion and information sites -- played a similar, but not greater role, as did the mainstream media and the candidates' campaigns in creating 'buzz.'"
"Similar, but not greater"?! The headline for the story is "Study: Blogs haven't displaced media." I don't exactly understand what they're measuring there, but the gist of the piece seems to be that, in a matter of a couple years, blogs have only become just as important as mainstream press in politics. Not moreso. We repeat, they are not more important at this time. So let's not let those bloggers get to big for their britches.
"Similar, but not greater"?! The headline for the story is "Study: Blogs haven't displaced media." I don't exactly understand what they're measuring there, but the gist of the piece seems to be that, in a matter of a couple years, blogs have only become just as important as mainstream press in politics. Not moreso. We repeat, they are not more important at this time. So let's not let those bloggers get to big for their britches.