In my WeeklyStandard.com column tomorrow, I write about a couple of new developments in the blogosphere. Too bad it had already been filed when I came across Michelle Malkin’s and Brian Maloney’s investigative report on Air America.
The substance is of course riveting, but I am also impressed by the innovation of tag teaming the story in two parts split over the two blogs. Great promotion for each and a better story for the partnership as well. It is as though two reporters for different papers in old media collaborated, with the papers taking turns with the story on different days. I am unaware of such a thing ever having occurred in old media, though it is possible that it has. I think Michelle and Brian have set a very good example with this approach, especially for single contributor blogs that like their independence, but also find their resources strapped by a particular story.
Now here’s a chilling (for Air America) opening to a sentence: “According to court records obtained by Radio Equalizer/MichelleMalkin.com…”
This is the other lightbulb that got turned on today: Lawyers who want stories in the press have long tried to interest reporters by slipping them crucial documents and generously providing pointers. Reporters are often uninterested in court docs because of space considerations and the sheer complexity of litigation. The labuage of the law is very often difficult to parse, and trying to explain complex civil litigation to a reporter is a challenge, especially if their time is as limited as their column inches.
The blogopshere is a whole new venue for litigators seeking some momentum shifting attention. If you have a blogger interested in your story who has an audience and some friends, there’s a new approach available to plaintiffs and defendants. Very interesting indeed.
There is already a thriving “jury selection” consulting profession. How long before Instapundit’s or the Powerline trio’s phones begin to ring with requests for a few hours consultation on how the blogosphere might be influential in the course of litigation?
There is more bad news for the Los Angeles Times and other papers. The Los Angeles Weekly’s Nikki Finke reports that the papers’ cash cow herd that are movie ads and listing fees are headed off to slaughter:
All advertisers dearly love the 18-to-34 demographic, and the Hollywood movie studios are no exception. In their eyes, the newsosaurs aren’t measuring up. Sources at the two Hollywood studios who are axing their movie display ads in newspapers gave me that information on the condition they not be identified. But, studiowide, it’s on everyone’s to-do list. ‘We’re rethinking our newspaper ads and I mean, literally, on every movie. Everybody is,’