Film critic Richard Schickel of Time magazine has written a piece for the L.A. Times disdaining bloggers, in particular criticism written by bloggers. He drips with condescension:
"Let me put this bluntly, in language even a busy blogger can understand: Criticism — and its humble cousin, reviewing — is not a democratic activity. It is, or should be, an elite enterprise..."
"I don't think it's impossible for bloggers to write intelligent reviews. I do think, however, that a simple 'love' of reading (or movie-going or whatever) is an insufficient qualification for the job..."
"...they need to prove, not merely assert, their right to an opinion."
If you can stomach reading the entire piece, by the end Schickel compares blogging to "finger-painting." Then he describes the glory of "writing for print": "It imposes on writer and reader a sense of responsibility that mere yammering does not. It is the difference between cocktail-party chat and logically reasoned discourse that sits still on a page, inviting serious engagement."
I find it ironic that a man who insists on proving one's "credentials" did the worst DVD commentary track I've heard to date (THE MARK OF ZORRO).
So much for credentials. Not that this criticism matters, coming from a lowly blogger. :)