The Los Angeles Times’ Michael Hiltzik won the Pulitzer Prize in 1999 for his investigation into corruption in the music recording business. Today, he writes the “Golden State” column for the L.A. Times business section and blogs for latimes.com. He sat down with OJR to talk about how he added blogging to his repertoire at the Times, as well as the state of the blogosphere from a newspaper writer’s perspective. An edited transcript follows:

[Update (4/20/2006): The Times suspended Hiltzik's blog today following several incidents where Hiltzik posted to blogs not under his own name.]

OJR: Tell me how you got started writing for latimes.com.

Hiltzik: Well, they asked me to do it. I had done some guest blogging over at Kevin Drum’s blog. I did a week or two while he was off somewhere. And I enjoyed it. And the website was looking for somebody to do that. And I basically said, “Yeah.” I was inclined to do something like that anyway.

OJR: Why?

Hiltzik: You know, I’m always looking for ways to get out more. For new formats. I wanted a way to get what I put in the column out to another audience. And also, to write about things that can’t go into the column.

OJR: Talk a little bit about those sorts of things. What kinds of things don’t go into the column that you could put into the blog?

Hiltzik: Well, the column is supposed to be oriented for California business and economy, California issues. And although I’m always sort of probing the outside of that envelope, I have a lot of interests that aren’t necessarily pure business. I was looking for a way to talk about politics, culture. And beyond that, there are things that come up that are within the column’s scope, that aren’t big enough for the column.

A good column topic has to have a certain heft. There are a lot of things that happen that just aren’t going to make it. I mean, they might be worth three or four paragraphs, but not 1,000 words. So I saw the blog as an opportunity to do some of that.

OJR: Do you find yourself actively looking for those shorter pieces to put into the column now, or is it just what’s kind of left over from the column topics themselves?

Hiltzik: It’s a combination. I mean, a lot of things come over the transom. And, I mean, the column can be pretty demanding. So in fact, the column is my first concern. Twice a week doesn’t sound like much, but it’s a lot if it means reporting. Three or four days of reporting. So, for the smaller items, it depends on how much energy I want to devote to hunting those down, or thinking about it. If I let my attention wander, and I’m really focused on the column, sometimes those things don’t get done. I find that I actually have to consciously think about the blog, to keep it going.

OJR: The role of a columnist, at this point, I think, is pretty well defined within the newspaper industry. But the role of a columnist/blogger is still evolving. What sorts of things have you changed in the course of doing your job, to accommodate this added role?

Hiltzik: Well, I don’t see myself as a columnist/blogger. I see myself as a columnist and a blogger. Eventually there may be more merging of the two. But at this point, that hasn’t happened. And part of the reason is that the column needs to meet a certain standard that I’ve set for it. So I can’t go at it half-heartedly, or with half attention. So, it’s the primary job. Now, the blog can amplify what’s in the column. And I think the most interesting thing I do with it is that the arrangement I made with the paper when I first started the blog was that we’re going to post the column, on column days, on the blog. And primarily what that did was that it moved the column out in front of [latimes.com's] registration wall. So, it — I mean, the goal was to open the market. You know, open the visibility of it. And I think that’s happening. It certainly made it more visible among the blog world. But it didn’t feel right to just post the column. So every time I post it, I generally write an introduction. That’s where I put the links, you know, where I might expand on points that I didn’t have room for in the column.

I use [the blog] a lot to dialogue with critics, or to come back at critics. At one point, it ended up with the role of answering online critics of the L.A. Times. Because there’s really no other way to do that, except online. I mean, I didn’t think it made sense for the paper to respond to some of the silly stuff in the paper. That wasn’t worth it. But I was the only columnist with a blog, so I used it.

OJR: Does your blog go through an editing process? And, if so, what’s that like?

Hiltzik: No.

OJR: No?

Hiltzik: No, none at all.

OJR: Did you have to negotiate that?

Hiltzik: No. Frankly there was no mechanism, even at the time. I mean, there was nobody in a position to edit. And I think essentially, they trusted me to know where the limits were. And to know that the limits were going be a little bit different from what they are in the column. I’ll tell you a funny story.

OJR: Go ahead.

Hiltzik: Four days [after I started the blog], issue number one comes up. And it’s language. I wrote a column — that was Monday. Now we’re on the Thursday column. And I wrote a column that was a Q & A, or an interview with a guy named TJ Rogers, who’s a CEO of a semiconductor company in Silicon Valley, who’s known as a wild man. And in the course of my conversation with him, we were talking about how his company had been managed his way — it had had a lot of problems, but it survived. And my walkaway quote in the column was him saying, “I’ll always survive, because I’m aggressive. I’m a hairy mammal so-and-so. But it was pretty goddamn tough.”

So, I used that quote as the close of my column, knowing that — assuming that, you know, the copy desk was going to say, “Ugh.” Sure enough, the next voice I heard was my editor saying, “Oh, it’s fine, you know. But ‘goddamn’ is out.” So I said, “Well, what are you doing?” “Well, we’re putting in three dots. It was pretty dot dot dot tough.” And I said, “Well, let’s think about it. First of all, every reader’s going to assume it’s much worse than the word that you’ve got. But leaping that, what if we ran it as is, in the blog version? Just run the whole quote? They’re not going to care. It’s the blog market, you know?”

So this is the business editor on the phone. And he says, “I don’t know, do we have a policy?” I said, “I don’t know, do we have a policy?” And he said, “Well,” he says, “I don’t care. The blog’s not under my jurisdiction. But you should call the blog people.” So, all right. So I call the guy who manages latimes.com. And he got very nervous. He said, “Well.” I said, “Do we have a policy?” He said, “Well, no. This has never come up.” “Well, let’s have a policy.”

Well, he finally said, “Well, since we agreed that the column would post in the paper and on the blog simultaneously — implicitly, we were saying it would be the same thing.” All right, fine. I guess that makes sense, although I’m not sure. See, part of the background was, I didn’t really care about the “goddamn.” But there were cases in the past when I would use something like that, or in that order, that I did care. And I tried to fight to keep it in there. Where I might actually really want to use it in the blog. So this is sort of precedent.

So, we agreed, “All right, fine. At this point, we’re just going to use the same thing.” So then I said, “Well, what would keep me, if this comes up again, from running the column in the newspaper version, but adding a link? Saying, ‘By the way, we edited this. But if you want to see the unedited version, click on this.’ ” And he got even more nervous. And I pointed out, of course, that already in the first four days of the blog, much, much rawer language had appeared on the page in the comments, than whatever — than we were even talking about.

Well, finally I said, “Look. We’ll do it this way in this column. But you have to keep two things in mind. One is that, you better come up with a policy. Because this is going to come up again and again. And it could come up tomorrow. You know, you’re already running seven blogs. You know, you better have an idea. And second of all, I just did you big favor. Because I didn’t have to ask. I could have just done it. And no one would have known. And I’m not sure that the editors of the LA Times would have bothered to read the column all the way through the jump on the blog. They would never have known. And I’d be making policy without them. So. We still don’t have a policy. (LAUGHTER) And what’s going to happen, I’m sure, or I suspect, is that one day, as more people blog, somebody’s going to cross that line. And then they’re going to have to make a policy in response.

OJR: Isn’t that how most policy’s made, though?

Hiltzik: Well, it’s hard to anticipate what you need a policy on. But they knew that they’re going to need a policy on a lot of this stuff. Then I blogged it and said, “Well, you remember I told you this is an experiment? The first lab is now open.”

OJR: What kind of feedback are you getting from the blog?

Hiltzik: Well, I have my own little cadre of commenters now. I get reactions — you know, from wider and wider portion of the blogosphere. It gets linked to more and more all the time. Readers, I think, still read the column — I have a lot of readers who read the column on latimes.com. I don’t see much evidence that any of them have crossed over to reading it on the blog. I think they’re two separate audiences. Distinctly separate. People either refer to the blog, or they refer to the column. They don’t seem to be referring to both. So, that’s another experiment. Who’s reading? Who’s reading the blog?

OJR: What else would you like to do with the blog — that you haven’t done yet?

Hiltzik: I don’t really know if I have an idea as to where I want to go. I want it to be more reflective of my interests. … I want more hours in the day, is what I want. I think what surprised me, even knowing what I knew from having blogged with Kevin, is how much time it can take up if you let it. It can dominate your day. You know, you can spend the entire day reading other blogs, making links. It’s just too easy to post something. And then you’re inclined to post. And now you’ve committed yourself to an hour working on it.

What I’ve tried not to do is let it be just a link factory. Like, you know, some blogs — you know. I mean, I never want to do, “Hey, this is interesting.” … I hate reading that. And so every post — you know, I end up putting some effort into it. You know, researching, even interviewing now and then. And that really makes it a voracious consumer of time. And I don’t know how it’s — I mean, it hasn’t gotten more integrated into latimes.com. It’s still where it always was, sort of a separate enterprise.

OJR: Do you think it needs to be more integrated?

Hiltzik: I’m not sure — it doesn’t need to be less integrated.

OJR: Do you think more writers should be doing the sort of thing that you’re doing?

Hiltzik: Well, that’s a really good question. I think if you are a newspaper staff writer, it’s very hard. It’s a very delicate balancing act. I’m basically an opinion journalist now. And that makes it acceptable. That makes it easier to do. Because I’m stating my opinion. I mean, speaking of journalism, I sort of see the column as — you know, here’s what I’ve reported on, here’s what I’ve found, and here’s what I construe to be the meaning of what I found. I’m going to sort of help the reader — you know, walk through things. I would be really leery of having just — you know, staff reporters blogging. I mean, we’re doing some of it. You know, our Oscars blog. But that still is sort of an entertainment reporter, which is a little freer.

OJR: What about the columnists?

Hiltzik: Well, you know, some of our columnists have asked me about it. Usually, where do you find the time, is the question. I think some of them are a little nervous about being told to do it, because they can see how much time. I mean, they don’t want to be ordered. And I can tell you, what I’ve told them, is that there was no question that when I first started the blog, I was blogging really aggressively. The column suffered. And I knew it suffered. I didn’t have the time to spend on the reporting that I usually would put into it. And I could see — I was winging it. And I cut back on the blogging. Because the column still has got to be number one. It’s got a much bigger audience.

So, that’s a concern. You know, we have an editor on the staff who just started a blog outside latimes.com, about the Angels and Dodgers. Which I think is great, because — you know, he happens to be a very funny writer, and this is going to give him an opportunity to do something that he wasn’t able to do. But I’m not sure what — I’m not sure how the paper can really have — you know, regular staff reporters out winging it on a blog, and meeting the demands of the blog audience for opinionated commentary, and broad-brush reporting. It’s really going to be hard.

OJR: Do you think newspapers need more of that kind of content online, to grow the readership there?

Hiltzik: Well, you know, that’s a good question. What are blogs, and what’s the market? Does it have the growth potential that everyone thought? I’m not yet convinced. I’ve been tracking a few blogs that I look at regularly. And from what I can see, their visitor numbers are going down. You know, has the whole thing peaked? I don’t know. There are more blogs, but that just means it’s harder to find ones that are worth reading.

You know, the one thing that we haven’t really talked about is, how are we defining a blog? And can we distinguish certain blogs from others? I mean, there are blogs that I read that are basically single subject blogs. The guy’s an expert who’s now devoted a huge amount of time to collecting everything he could find on this one subject. And he’s going to put it in one place, and post it as a catalog. There’s a guy who does a blog on stem cells, on the California stem cell program. That’s first class. And I think it’s become more and more important.

Then there are political opinion blogs, which are a dime a dozen at this point. And I suspect have found their audience, and that’s it. Hugh Hewitt — is he attracting more and more readers? I don’t believe it. If you buy his act, you read his blog. But it’s not growing. Then there are a handful that are purely entertaining. That may grow, as people discover. And then there are some that are serious attempts at reporting, and that are providers of information. You know. Josh Marshall, Kevin Drum’s blog, I would put into that category. Where you go to it because there’s actual — you know, there’s something to learn. Not somebody to tell you how to think about what you already know. That’ll grow. So, where is a newspaper blog supposed to fit into all that? I would argue the last category is probably the best thing. Except for, you know, certain individuals who can build a following because of their style, or their writing, or their humor. But that’s a rarity. So. So, I don’t know if it’s going to be a necessity for newspapers to have a blog. I guess — you know. Every newspaper maybe should have a small stable. But it’s got to pick and choose them very carefully.

OJR: What kind of advice would you give to a newspaper journalist who’s thinking about doing more online-only writing?

Hiltzik: I’d tell them to be prepared for everything to be a lot more effort than it looks like on the surface. Your formatting, your shaping. Your post — if you’re doing it right, you’re also incorporating multimedia. You know, or even photographs. And you’re doing it all on your own. So, everything that goes up takes a lot more time than just writing something down and moving it to the desk. And you’re not getting feedback in the same way. You may not be getting it at all. You’re doing it on your own. No one’s — you don’t have an editor. So, there’s that. You know, I’d say, you know, keep in mind that you probably are going to have a different audience. And you may not know what it is at first. I’m not sure what mine is, online. … I assume that online, to the extent people are reading my column in the L.A. Times, that it resembles a newspaper readership. Maybe younger. I hope it’s younger. But it’s really the time factor which continually surprises me. How demanding it can be.

I think it can be a lot harder to shape a thought online than it is — because the format is so fluid — if you’re sitting down and writing into a newspaper space, or magazine, or book. All of which I’ve done. You basically have a sense of the real estate. If you’ve been doing it long enough, you have a sense of the rhythm that you need to achieve. And that could be anything from whether you’re writing a brief to a chapter in the book. Online, you have to think anew all of it. You have to decide what sort of — I mean, it’s such a wide range of online writing now. You know? Some people write columns. It’s a column. It’s just reading it online. Some write — you know, links. Some write hits. Some are just commenting on other things.

I actually think that the whole Gawker Media thing may end up inheriting the blog earth. Because this is something else that I’ve thought and written somewhat about. Is, life is too short for anybody to deal with finding blogs that they want to make part of their lives. I mean, look at Kevin Roderick’s blog roll. I mean, there have got to be 300 links on there. What am I supposed to do, check all of them, even once? It’s not going to happen. And what you need in blogs, as you need in every medium that’s ever been on earth, is you need intermediaries to select and market. And that’s what Gawker is. You know you’re going to get a certain tone of voice. You know you’re going to get a certain number of new — I mean, doesn’t he even require a certain number of postings a day?

I think when I started, one of the first things that they said to me was, “You want to post at least once a day. Because you keep people coming back. And if you don’t, then you’ll have to get them anew. You have to start over.” So, that sort of thing. … I don’t know what — Pajamas Media is just so gross, that I’m not sure it’s going to work. But Gawker is — I mean, I don’t read Defamer regularly. And I don’t read Gawker regularly. But I go on there frequently enough that I often look and see, “Well, you know, what do they have that’s new? I mean, what new sites have they opened?” And then I’ll go check them out. Just to see.

OJR: Well, that’s important. That sort of cross-merchandising, and branding.

Hiltzik: I mean, outside of that, there’s going to be a bare handful that can survive, certainly.

I haven’t read Glenn Reynold’s book. Or Hewitt’s books. But the idea that blogs, as a format, were inevitably going to allow quality to bubble over the surface and find its audience, I just think is naïve. The world doesn’t work that way. You can’t count on people discovering you by chance. You have to affiliate yourself. You have to find a way to get marketed. I mean, that’s what newspapers have, that’s an advantage. But as I said at the outset, it’s going to be a very delicate relationship, because of the difference in how you address your audience, and what it will accept, and how it reflects on the rest of your enterprise.