Watchbloggers are (generally anonymous) bloggers who are each assigned one journalist covering the U.S. presidential campaign. This is an interesting answer to the question about “but are they trustworthy?”

“Credibility is an interaction — not an aura,” Rosen said. “If a citizen decides to track the reporting of Dan Balz, and everything Balz writes is there, every TV appearance is cataloged, there is a faithful attempt to document all his work, the links are good and take you places, the Weblog ‘works’ to open up Balz’s campaign journalism. Credibility has a lot to do with reliability. If a citizen’s site is reliable for certain things, people will use it for those things. Build a reliable Weblog that tracks something and you have credibility.”

Links ++ at the Online Journalism Review at USC Annenberg.


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

4 thoughts on “watchblogs”

  1. nick

    The so-called “watchblogs” are generally anonymous bloggers

    Who watches the watchbloggers?

  2. Jill

    Ah, well, see there’s the adopt a watchblogger program, where anonymous bloggers each choose a watchblogger to track, following their every keystroke.

  3. Jill

    Lars has good comments to this. English summary at the bottom of the post.

  4. Anders Jacobsen's sideblog

    US Campaign Watchbloggers
    Watchbloggers are (generally anonymous) bloggers who are each assigned one journalist covering the U.S. presidential campaign […]

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

screenshot of blogpost from sept 11, 2001, about blogger.com showing blog posts about the attacks
Networked Politics social media

25 years since September 11

I’ve been reading through my blog posts on September 11, 2001 and the days that followed. The things that stand out to me – in addition to the horror of the attack itself – are how massively we (or at least I) used the web to understand what was happening, […]

AI STORIES

AI-generated stories have longer endings than human stories

My colleague Jessica Witte has just shared a preprint where she compared the emotional arcs of the stories we generated using gpt-4o-mini to those of human-authored (pre-2022) stories from the subreddit r/WritingPrompts, conveniently gathered in this dataset. She found a distinct difference in the endings of the LLM-generated stories: both […]

How to peer review a paper in 2026

Dorothy Bishop, a psychologist, wrote a useful list of what reviewers need to look out now that so many papers are bad science that looks good thanks to LLMs. Read her whole blog post, she explains it well, but here’s a brief version because I’m pretty sure we’ll be needing […]

“So what if it was ChatGPT? It *could* have been true!”

I recently read a good article on the different kinds of truth a language model operates with by Luke Mann, Liam Magee and Vanicka Arora, Truth Machines: Synthesizing Veracity in AI Language Models, but despite its lovely typology of truths (consensus, correspondence, coherence and pragmatic) it doesn’t help me with […]

AI STORIES

AI shimmer and sparkle

I have this hunch that sparkles and glow and shimmer are somehow a point in the latent spaces of LLMs that have more connections than you would expect. Perhaps their connotation to magic and to the unknown matches some of the mystique of genAI? Or perhaps these words are used […]