Daniel Rolle interviews Sir Peter for Cherwell, Oxford University’s student newspaper:
"The main difference between a publication like the TLS and the blog is a distinction between a ‘judiciously argued judgement and a quick fix of opinion’. All the same, on the whole, Stothard seems to subscribe to the views of J.S. Mill: only within a free market of ideas will truth emerge, as good ideas displace bad ones and ignorance is progressively banished. As Mill has argued, the value of open debate and discussion is that ‘bad’ ideas are exposed as bad, meaning that ‘good’ ideas prevail…"
"…the good journalist will have an eye for the interesting, and will find a way of bringing the reader or viewer into the story."
Bloggers who take Peter’s advice for journalists, are likely to prevail.
Speaking of which, here’s Ed Champion concluding a recent post on this topic:
"It has become evident that the biggest problem with this “debate” is the surfeit of stubborn souls unwilling to consider the alternative form, whether it’s the blogger who refuses to consider the virtues of editing or thinking through his post a bit or the print advocate so terrified of anarchic fun that he cannot find it within himself to trust his instinct from time to time. I’d like to think that this can be bridged."