Though a lot of blogs consist of conventional aspects which would be found in more professional journalist outlets likes newspapers which essentially relies on interviews as a source of news but are they represented with the unbiased nature they should have ? (I know that some papers like the Sun who support the Tories have biased but I'm trying to look at it from a academic utopia view)
For example nostalgic blogger critic Linkara interviewed voice artist and former Power Ranger Johhny Yong Bosch (http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videolinks/linkara/specials/26652-interview-with-johnny-yong-bosch). Straight off when the reviewer begins to talk to him about his views of on what should be done with his character could be seen as bias as the producers may have had a reason for his character not being killed off and how he describes himself as the 'background ranger' could again be lob sided because theirs no balance.
Again listening to this interview two other flaws become apparent. Throughout the interview a lot of sound clips are used from various animes and the Power Rangers which clearly infringe copyright and could face a legal penalty. Also the quality of the interview is slightly echoey and crackly which could be because of the quality of equipment and the fact is sounds like it was done over Skype.
Focusing on a wider view of blogging in general one of the benefits it has especially when it came to the Egyptian revolution of last year was it enabled the public to get organised and overthrow the government at the time.
According to Martin Conboy 'online journalism will come increasingly to be considered as genre in it own right rather than as an adjunct to print, radio or television.', so the question is does it require censorship ?
TV and Radio have Ofcom and print has the PCC (which debatably could be compared to a 'toothless dog' and has little authority). Since SOPA and PIPA proved widely unpopular with the internet community because it essentially attacked free speech to the point the internet would cease to exist as it is it could be more logical to approach it from the idea that bloggers who claim to be 'journalists' should have to abide to a code of ethics, I'm going to make it clear I don't want the internet to be censored I just want their to be a scheme of accreditation to ensure those with news and journalistic content are heard.
To ensure theirs no kind of bias it should be monitored by a group like the NUJ but the shear scale of the internet hinders ever such a move. Though if this was ever to go ahead I believe a version of the NUJ code of conduct would make a good template (http://media.gn.apc.org/nujcode.html)
Even if my ideas are impractical I believe the public are being feed a negative image of blogger journalists. For example in the film Contagion Jude Laws character is depicted as being sleazy and deceptive and overall as unhinged individual, these puts truthful journalist bloggers in a poor light. Though their is a positive portrayal which resides in comics of the Spider-man character Betty Brant who works a journalist blogger and always searches for the uncensored truth.
Though to conclude this negative depiction of bloggers comes back Chris Frosts findings of how journalists are depicted are that essentially journalists serve as background characters and rung for the hero 'reporters are played as unpleasant in order to build the moral uprightness of the hero. This almost means that the reporter is seen as someone who is either self obsessed or rude and overbearing.'