http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/08/opinion/08sun3.html
sorry to laugh at you Adam, but I wouldn't publish this sophmoric piece of shit over at Powerline (or its dead-tree equivalent, Highlights magazine...)
anyway, here we go again...
The Latest Rumbling in the Blogosphere: Questions About Ethics
by Adam CohenBloggers like to demonize the MSM (that's Mainstream Media), but it is increasingly hard to think of the largest news blogs as being outside the mainstream. Bloggers have been showing up at national political conventions, at the World Economic Forum at Davos and on the cover of Business Week. Establishment warhorses like Arthur Schlesinger Jr. are signing on to write for Arianna Huffington's blog collective. And Garrett Graff, of FishbowlDC, broke through the cyberceiling recently and acquired the ultimate inside-the-Beltway media credential: a White House press pass.
Actually, you might be right on this Adam... Bloggers may be the mainstream. I mean, all bloggers I know are pretty down to earth people... you know, web masters, housewives, mechanics, economists, accountants, state workers, etc. Real fucking people, ya know what I mean? On the other hand, the MSM is populated by a bunch of writers whose chief complaint is that the fois gras at last nights social gathering was a little too salty. I'll be damned if I remember the last time any of you fuckers in the MSM apologized for the saturation coverage of Swift Boat liars, runaway bride, Laci Peterson, or war cheerleading... y'all must be writing with hangovers if ya think that is what any of us in the mainstream care about... Meanwhile, some of us in the mainstream actually care about the methods Bush will use to cheat millions of middle class out of their social security... Where's that fucking headline? Because, well, I dunno, maybe I'm wrong, but dontchya think regular people want to know small little details like what kind of cat food they'll be eating for dinner in retirement?
So yeah... we are mainstream, you fuckers ar out of touch... we need to change your name. thanks for pointing that out.
The thing about influence is that, as bloggers well know, it is only a matter of time before people start trying to hold you accountable. Bloggers are so used to thinking of themselves as outsiders, and watchdogs of the LSM (that's Lame Stream Media), that many have given little thought to what ethical rules should apply in their online world. Some insist that they do not need journalistic ethics because they are not journalists, but rather activists, or humorists, or something else entirely. But more bloggers, and blog readers, are starting to ask whether at least the most prominent blogs with the highest traffic shouldn't hold themselves to the same high standards to which they hold other media.
Or... how 'bout this, dipshit? How 'bout you guys, when you pick up a blog story... well, how 'bout y'all practice a little journalisming first? In more than one place I heard about a faked memo regarding the Terry Schiavo case... Your (and by "your", I mean the MSM's) blog of the year, Powerline (now, I know 2004 was a bad year, but was it really that fucking bad?) put forth baseless accusations, y'all pick it up and print it and now you've got the fucking gall to lecture us? Puhlease...
Every mainstream news organization has its own sets of ethics rules, but all of them agree broadly on what constitutes ethical journalism. Information should be verified before it is printed, and people who are involved in a story should be given a chance to air their viewpoints, especially if they are under attack. Reporters should avoid conflicts of interest, even significant appearances of conflicts, and disclose any significant ones. Often, a conflict means being disqualified to cover a story or a subject. When errors are discovered or pointed out by internal or external sources, they must be corrected.
Two words: Judith Fucking "Queen of all Iraq" Miller.
It really is laughable that you write this in the paper that still hasn't retracted a fucking thing she's written.
Bloggers often invoke these journalistic standards in criticizing the MSM, and insist on harsh punishment when they are violated. The blogs that demanded Dan Rather's ouster accused him of old-school offenses: not sufficiently checking the facts about President Bush's National Guard service, refusing to admit and correct errors, and having undisclosed political views that shaded the journalism. Eason Jordan, CNN's chief news executive, resigned this year after a blogmob attacked him for a reported statement at the World Economic Forum at Davos that the military had aimed at journalists in Iraq and killed 12 of them. Their complaint was even more basic than in Mr. Rather's case: they were upset that Mr. Jordan said something they believed to be untrue.
But Mr. Rather's and Mr. Jordan's misdeeds would most likely not have landed them in trouble in the world of bloggers, where few rules apply. Many bloggers make little effort to check their information, and think nothing of posting a personal attack without calling the target first - or calling the target at all. They rarely have procedures for running a correction. The wall between their editorial content and advertising is often nonexistent. (Wonkette, a witty and well-read Washington blog, posts a weekly shout-out inside its editorial text to its advertisers, including partisan ones like Democrats.org.) And bloggers rarely disclose whether they are receiving money from the people or causes they write about.
You do irony very well. Isn't it ironic that the two cases you cite are right wing case studies in agitprop with very little grounding in anything substantial. According to CJR, the MSM made as many, or more, mistakes in covering the Rather story than Rather did in his whole fucking career. You bastards never thought to ask how Buckhead, a very well connected republican operative and Atlanta lawyer - with zero typography expertise - was able to sniff out the "forgeries" in just a coupla hours...
and y'all never thought to investigate the veracity of Jordan's remarks, huh? Because in the movie Control Room it's explained how the American military was given precise coordinates to the hotel offices of Al Jazeera and all the rest of the news agencies in Baghdad. They go on to explain that on the same day, two different Arab news agency offices were attacked by American troops - killing two Arab journalists... Very suspicious indeed. And since then, well, there have been scores of journalists killed - but none from Fox News...
Bloggers may need to institutionalize ethics policies to avoid charges of hypocrisy. But the real reason for an ethical upgrade is that it is the right way to do journalism, online or offline. As blogs grow in readers and influence, bloggers should realize that if they want to reform the American media, that is going to have to include reforming themselves.
You go fucking first. If you are gonna lecture me, set the fucking example. Ya know, we've done pretty well. I know I won't be changing where I get my news anytime soon. NYT, Washinton Post, WSJ - yeah, I'll keep in touch; you guys are primary news sources, after all (and thank you for your Abramoff investigations - even when you expose democrats, I think it's a good thing that Washington gets cleaned up - just one favor please - don't try to equate the screw-ups of democrats with the out and out corruption of Bob Ney, Tom Delay, etc.)... anyway, yeah - the old line media will, for the foreseeable future, take the lead in breaking news... but for my money, Kos, Soj, Kevin Drum, Josh Marshall and Atrios offer the best analysis available.
Some advice for you Adam: You would do well to spend more time at http://mediamatters.org
Go ahead and compare it to the Scaife-funded Accuracy in Media... you might begin to understand why we on the left think you folks suck...