Pissed Old Hacks Baffled by New Media*

My wise, witty and winsome colleague Andrew Rogers, Esq brings to my notice this fine bit of debating from The Guardian‘s Michael Billington:

Is blogging changing theatre criticism? Undoubtedly, yes. The newspaper review
is now part of a broader debate about what is happening in the world of
theatre. The professional critic is no longer regarded, if she or he
ever was, as a lone, ivory-tower expert. We are all now exposed to the
democratic hurly-burly of blogs, where our opinions can be countered,
corrected, reviled or even, on rare occasions, enthusiastically
endorsed.

Well, hurrah. Break out the booze, chaps. Another journalist has fallen to the blog borg.

Oh, hang on, what’s this?

But, precisely because we live in age of relentless PR, the
professional critic’s voice becomes ever more vital. I see it as part
of one’s job to shut one’s ears to the relentless din and simply judge
a show on its merits.

OK, cancel the party. He’s not quite there yet. He still holds to that intangible aura of superiority. We, the professional critics, are superior to you, the blogging hoi polloi, because we are immune to the wiles of the PR types. Our discernment is superior, our insight deeper.

It’s the classic hack’s delusion. We know more, and our opinions are more important, because we are journalists. We have control of the channels of information, so we must be better. The Reduced Michael Billington nails it: