Expert Analysis from "Amateur" Journalists

Jason Wood has written an excellent analysis of the upcoming NetSuite IPO. Reading it made me realize something about bloggers, who are often thought of as "amateur journalists". Jason may not be a professional writer, but he is a professional hedge fund manager. Many professional journalists who write about stocks are only amateur financial analysts. So who's the amatuer?

When I read about sports from Mark Cuban, or technology from Tim Bray, or law from John Palfrey, or high-def filmmaking from Mike Curtis, I'm hearing directly from experts in their respective fields—the sources from whom an excellent journalists would get his facts. So if I can go straight to the source, why would I want someone who is a professional writer but an amateur in the subject at hand standing between me and the expert?

I've decided to pare down the number of feeds to which I subscribe by applying the expert source test: if the feed comes from someone who's an expert in his field, the feed stays. If not, the feed goes. I expect to lose quite a few bloggers' feeds—and quite a few professional journalists'.

Comments

[Jason Wood]

Charlie,

That's a supremely kind and flattering thing to say, thanks a lot. One of the reasons I love the blogosphere is because it presents an opportunity to learn from smart people with decidedly different lenses than my own.

Keep hearing those cha-chings on the home front,

Jason

[Christina]

why do you read Malcolm Gladwell? That's why you read professional writers. He wrote nothing new in Tipping Point and Blink, just made things already known to experts in fields accessible to us slobs.
Good writers make complex subjects accessible to the rest of us. Some experts can write as well as know their fields, and some writers don't understand their subjects and can only write well but wrongly, but a great writer knows how to understand his topic enough in order to communicate it to you and me.