- Pageviews, hits, unique visitors — these will drive the news and what articles get written, and not just for blogs
- “Sources” doesn’t mean what you think it means
- The above two points are not entirely bad
- Just because the above trends are harmless (at least with sports), doesn’t make them good, though, either
Maybe we can’t complain about the digital media coverage we get because it’s no longer in the bloggers’ or journalists’ hands, and instead is increasingly determined by algorithm, based on our viewing habits. In other words, maybe we don’t get the high-brow sports coverage we think we want, because, instead, we simply get the sports coverage we deserve.
I think this is relevant to the readership of this blog because the way that Michigan football is treated by the mainstream media (Freep, ESPN, etc.) that irks us so much is in large part dictated by Chris Brown's (1) and (2).
On the other hand, I don't think that Chris Brown is positive enough. His blog, and MGoBlog, are somewhat immune to the pressures he describes and therefore to the voracious appetite to attract new visitors to their site with crazy headlines and breaking news ("Moss to Vikings"). The internet is capitalist insofar as it can very precisely track how many hits a page gets, how long people stay there, etc., but it is also liberating because it is able to tap into niches like "smart Michigan fans" and provide them with high-quality products.