How bloggers let down over South Ossetia

There will be a lot written about user generated content during the conflict in the Caucasus,this blog has illustrated some of that already and its usefulness especially in areas where the media simply couldn't get to.

Talking though about general blogging,But it is worth reading Joshua Foust's piece over at CJR.Joshua blogs at Registan.net and he writes that

in the case of the ongoing conflict between Russia and Georgia, the blogging world mostly failed to live up to its promises.

and he continues

Soon after the war started on August 8th, on-the-ground reports were being filed by Russian and Georgian bloggers, some of which were even in English and, thus, required no translation. Yet most large blogs just continued to link to the same sources linking to the same stories based on official statements about the war. Or (just as bad) they linked to omnivorous pundits with little more to offer than stridently uninformed opinions. Where is the value added of such a thing?

Admittedly he is looking at the American market which

Rather than providing the clarity, nuance, and honesty that they promise to provide, the big blogs instead retreated to their comfortable and predictable ideological corners. By keeping to their usual haunts, these blogs did their readers a tremendous disservice: they were just as incurious and ideological as they regularly accuse the MSM of being

Every action viewed as a larger design?

I blogged yesterday about the Russian's not being happy about the coverage in the Western Press in the war in the Caucasus.

Over at Sean's Russian blog it is CNN that come in for criticism

checking CNN for updates on Georgia is liable to make your head spin. Every small Russian action is instantly viewed as part of a larger design. The latest evidence that sparked fears of an assault on Tbilisi? A Russian convoy that was heading toward the Georgian capital but then turned off the road back to South Ossetia. Saakashvilli interpreted this as Russian forces “encroaching upon the capital.” Thankfully, even CNN is starting to not be so easily fooled. CNN Correspondent Matthew Chance was traveling with said convoy, and though he couldn’t say where it was going, he did report that it didn’t get any.

resistance from Georgian soldiers, and it was possible that the Russians were on a scouting mission to choose a buffer zone between the breakaway region of South Ossetia and Georgian territory. Chance described the flag-waving Russians as relaxed.

Hat Tip Frontline blog

Russia complains of Western media bias

I see that the Russian authorities are accusing the Western media of bias over the reporting of the conflict in South Ossetia.

Deputy foreign minister Grigory Karasin said at a press conference that

We want television screens in the West to be showing not only Russian tanks, and texts saying Russia is at war in South Ossetia and with Georgia, but also showing the suffering of the Ossetian people, the murdered elderly people and children, the destroyed towns of South Ossetia and Tskhinvali,”

and added that

Western media is a well-organized machine, which is showing only those pictures that fit in well with their thoughts. We find it very difficult to squeeze our opinion into the pages of their newspapers.”

I think by and large coverage has been fair,the problem from reporting on the Russian side has been actually getting journalists into South Ossetia.Hence the coverage of bombardment that we have seen up to now has be of Gori.

It must also be remembered that Georgia has tried to run a slick PR operation aimed at the West almost as an appeal for military help.

The understanding or lack of it of the situation has not helped either.As with many conflicts the David in the battle will be given sympathy even though he may,which I think is the case in this conflict was the cause of it.

The war exploded onto our screens during a traditional quiet time and that added with the Olympics has meant that the detailed background has not always been available.

No doubt this will be analysed in some depth at a later date but by and large the West has reported on it with a degree of impartiality.