Saturday 18 Aug 2018 | 05:39 | SYDNEY
Saturday 18 Aug 2018 | 05:39 | SYDNEY

Is \'blog\' still a dirty word?


Sam Roggeveen


22 November 2010 11:08

One reason for creating The Interpreter in 2007 was to allow the Lowy Institute to get views and analysis of contemporary events out to the world direct and unfiltered — in other words, to bypass the mainstream media.

Mind you, the Institute has excellent relations with the media and our scholars appear regularly on TV, radio and the papers. The Interpreter has also become a useful resource for many journalists, and it is always gratifying to see the blog quoted in the media, such as the editorial in today's Australian:  

As Stephan Fruehling and Benjamin Schreer from the Australian National University wrote on the Lowy Institute's website recently, thanks to our military deployment in Afghanistan (which flows from our US, rather than European connections) "many in NATO have come to view Australia as a prototypical 'global partner' with whom NATO can work to address new global security challenges".

It's perhaps impolite to quibble, but this is the Lowy Institute's website, and you won't find the article there. The piece referenced by The Australian appeared on The Interpreter. Granted, The Interpreter is not a blog in the purest sense, but 'blog' or even 'zine' would have been a clearer description than 'website'.

Note also that The Australian doesn't provide a hyperlink to Fruehling-Schreer piece in its editorial. This still seems to be the standard practice among Australian big media websites. Maybe its just easier for them — creating loads of links takes time. But it creates the impression that they are worried about readers clicking on the links and then never coming back. It shouldn't be a concern, if the content is good enough.

(Ed. Note: This piece looks to have gone offline for some reason overnight, but it was not taken down deliberately and has not been edited.)