Doing one of my periodic clearouts of the mountain of dead tree that I still accumulate, I found this, in the FT magazine from last February. It's by Trevor Butterworth, who, in the course of an extended poo-pooing of blogging,* argues:
"In contrast to the British and European media, which had their origins in the Enlightenment and the belief that journalism was a forum for debate and argument - even philosophy, according to David Hume - the American press is a 19th century creation animated by the pursuit of fact. Blogging - if you will forgive the cartoon philosophising - brought the European Enlightenment to the US. Each blogger was his, or her, own printing press, spontaneously exercising their freedom to criticise. Which is great. But along the way, opinion became the new pornography on the internet."
Maybe this explains the differing reactions of old media practitioners on each side of the pond. Many American hacks hate blogging, because it does something different, and thus confuses them. Many British hacks (see examples passim) are equally scornful, because it does the same thing as they do, often better (?) and thus threatens them.
* It won't work because it won't make money, he says - cf Patroclus's PR-related comment appended to the previous post.