Third player in the blogs v. MSM debate

In a follow-up to the "Points" debate on Dallas' amenability to intelligentsia, Jerome Weeks inadvertently makes a case for the sort of media enterprise we propose:

But it's costly, labor-intensive journalism that's needed, in part, for  an intelligentsia to thrive, journalism that blogs can't do. We're talking about dependable, one-stop, across-the-board reporting and reviewing of area theater, dance, TV, music, books, opera, museums. Only newspapers do this. Not radio, not TV, not blogs.

If a blog does, it'll cease to be a blog. It'll be a full-fledged news outfit. It'll have a staff.

We certainly don't share Weeks' condescension towards blogs as a reliable source -- but it's the consistency and completeness, particularly on local topics, that they inherently lack -- and that's part of their beauty. Citizen Journalists provide incredible insight and depth on myriad topics, but unless someone's daily bread depends on delivering local news and information, an awful lot can fall through the cracks. Until RSS (or something of its ilk) becomes mainstream (which it's not), there's not a replacement for the editor. And local, in particular, can't be covered completely by unpaid journalists. That's not for a lack of ability, per se -- it's a lack of resource.

Of course, we've pretty much beaten the dead horse of the MSM's various endemic weaknesses into the ground. The point is this: There is a third way. Some mainstream players see that. But until these new ideas infect the industry -- not just geographically, but to the point that they bleed over from the newsroom into the boardroom -- there's an unmet need in the marketplace.