We've all heard talk about how the "new media" will revolutionize journalism, but we in the competitive debate world just haven't seen it. In the heat of a round, the answer "their card is just some guys blog, ours is the new york times" tends to be pretty convincing. More seriously, the niche best filled by blogs and the like seems to be either in hey-stuff-is-happening-now-omg-and-I'm-blogging-about-it stories or in providing thoughts and opinions that relate to the "average joe," neither of which is particularly useful for debaters.
This is why some guy's home grown election tracker website normally wouldn't be a very good debate source.
But what if some guy gets written up in newsweek after he "had outperformed every established pollster?"
As we say in the biz, that's one hell of a pro-dict