Hence, when writers use their blogs to express their ideas, they are only promoting just blogging, but also different social models.  In particular, one of the running discussions within journalism and blogging is what "blogging" means for the way news "happens" and is covered. This leads to questions over intellectual property and the role of the mass media in society. Many bloggers differentiate themselves from the mainstream media, while others consider themselves as members of that media working through a different channel (Lasica, 2001).   But most see blogging as a means of “getting around the filter” and pushing messages directly to the public (Jensen, 2003).

The importance of a blog as a way of building an electronic community inevitably forced the academic and journalism community to take notice, for the potential for blogs as a means of publicizing other projects had grown too substantial to ignore.  Indeed, established schools of journalism began researching the blogging phenomenon, and noting the differences between the current practice of journalism and blogging.

In fact, some analysts argue that blogs are just an extension of the alternative press, for in the 1960’s, a convergence of cultural, political, and technological circumstances had set the stage for the rise of such a phenomenon (Jensen, 2003).  At their worst, these early "underground" newspapers were strident and untrustworthy. At their best, they broke new ground in reporting and writing and bore witness to tectonic shifts in our society, and they challenged and altered the dusty mainstream press as well.  Blogs are a mirror of that world, only it is more interconnected and in a different form of media.

Since 2003, blogs have gained increasing notice and coverage for their role in breaking, shaping, or spinning news stories.  As mentined earlier, one of the most significant journalistic online events that occurred was the sudden emergence of an interest in the Iraq war, when both left-wing and right-wing bloggers took calculated and zealous points of view that did not reflect the traditional left-right divide at all.  Not surprisingly, blogs which gathered news on Iraq, exploded in popularity.  

In fact, the Iraq war is the first “blog war” in many ways, for unlike the previous Gulf War, Iraqi bloggers gained wide readership from outside Iraq for the first time.  One blogger who called himself Salam Pax even published a book of his blog. Blogs were also created by soldiers serving in the Iraq war. Such “milblogs” gave readers a new perspective on the realities of war, as well as often offering differing viewpoints from those of official news sources.  Two days after the United States began its “shock and awe” campaign against Iraq – and the story dominating TV networks was the rumor (later proven false) that Saddam Hussein’s infamous cousin, Ali Hassan al-Majid (“Chemical Ali”), had been killed in an airstrike.  Yet, for thousands of other people around the world who switched on their computers rather than their television sets, the lead story was the sudden and worrisome disappearance of Salam Pax, the mysterious blogger from Iraq.

If the first Gulf War introduced the world to the “CNN effect,” then the second Gulf War was blogging’s coming out party. (Drezner and Farrell, 2004).  Salam Pax was the most famous blogger during that conflict (he later signed a book and movie deal), but countless other online diarists, including U.S. military personnel, emerged to offer real-time analysis and commentary during and after the war.

Otherwise known as the “Baghdad Blogger,” Salam Pax was the pseudonym for a 29-year-old Iraqi architect whose online diary, featuring wry and candid observations about life in wartime, transformed him into a cult figure. It turned out that technical difficulties, not U.S. cruise missiles or Baathist Party thugs, were responsible for the mysterious three-day Salam Pax disappearance. In the months that followed, his readership escalated to the  millions.  Interestingly, his accounts were even quoted in the New York Times, BBC Online, and the British Guardian newspaper.

Blogs were often used to draw attention to obscure news sources, for example posting links to the traffic cameras in Madrid as a huge anti-terrorism demonstration filled the streets in the wake of the terrorist March 11 attacks (O'Brien, 2004).  Bloggers would often provide nearly-instant commentary on televised events, which became a secondary meaning of the word “blogging,” such as “I am blogging Rice's testimony” (meaning, “I am posting my reactions to Rice's testimony to my blog as I watch it.”)  Such real-time commentary has taken on the neologism of “liveblogging” (Farber, 2004)

By 2004, the role of blogs became increasingly mainstream, as political consultants, news services and political candidates began using them as tools for outreach and opinion formation. Anthologies of blog pieces also began to reach print, and blogging personalities began appearing on radio and television. In the summer of that year both the Democratic and Republican National Conventions credentialed bloggers, and blogs became a standard part of the publicity arsenal, with mainstream programs, such as Chris Matthews’ NBC Hardball, forming their own blogs.

However, if there is such thing as a watershed of blogging in the journalism world, it would be "Rathergate," which is viewed by many bloggers as the advent of blogs’ acceptance by the mass media.   A plethora of news blogs were behind the Rathergate scandal that involved Dan Rather of CBS and memos used on the show 60 Minutes II. Within 72 of the news story hitting the air waves, a group of fervent conservative bloggers had built a case that Dan Rather’s documents were likely forgeries. The evidence presented eventually created such concern over the issue that CBS was forced to address the situation and make an apology for their inadequate reporting techniques. Two months later, Dan Rather announced that he would step down from the CBS anchor chair.  It also showed how blogs could keep the pressure on an established news source, forcing defenses and then a retraction of the original story (Lasica, 2001).

Blogs do two things that the traditional mainstream media simply cannot. First off, blogs are personal. Almost all of them are imbued with the temper of their writer. This personal touch is much more in tune with our current sensibility than were the opinionated magazines and newspapers of old.  As readers are increasingly doubtful of the mass media, particularly the authority of such media conglomerates as The Washington Post or National Review, they realize that behind the curtain are fallible writers and editors who are no more inherently trustworthy than a lone blogger who has earned a reader’s respect.

The second thing blogs do is seize the means of production.  It's hard to underestimate the grand effect blogging has accomplished.  As Andrew Sullivan argues, for as long as journalism has existed, writers of whatever kind have had one route to readers: through the editor and the publisher. Even in the most benign circumstances, this process inevitably distorts journalism.  As a result, most journalism unconsciously caters to a handful of people - the editors looking for a certain kind of story, the publishers seeking to push a particular venture, or the advertisers who influence the editors and owners. Blogging simply “circumvents” this primordial ritual (Sullivan, 2002).

For all the history made by newspapers between 1960 and 2000, the profession was also busy contracting, standardizing, and homogenizing. Most cities now have their monopolist daily, their alt weekly or two, and their business journal. Journalism is done a certain way, by a certain kind of people.  However, bloggers are basically oblivious to such traditions, so reading the best of them is like receiving "a bracing slap in the face," a reminder that America is far more diverse and iconoclastic than its newsrooms. (Welch, 2003).