Lookee Who Wants To Join The Blogosphere...
This one comes from Drudge, and I had to laugh when I first read about this.
In a move unlikely only because it's taken this long to happen, pundit-about-town Arianna Huffington is extending her hosting largess to the blogosphere.
This month the wannabe California governor is launching a Slate-like Web site where a cast of bigwigs, including Sen. Jon Corzine (D-N.J.), David Geffen, Barry Diller, Larry David, Tom Freston, Ari Emanuel, Jim Wiatt, Tina Brown and Harold Evans will each have their own blog from which to spout Big Thoughts about politics.
Huffington wouldn't comment, but it was confirmed that a soft-launch of the Huffington Report would be up and running before the end of April.
It will be interesting to see how these honchos fare in the Wild West of the 'Net, where contentious, or even off-hand remarks are seized upon within seconds by millions and held up for debate (and often scorn) on scores of Web sites. Or even if Diller or Geffen will actually type their thoughts.
Unlike corporations, the Internet does not provide legions of publicists and spinmeisters to keep the public at bay.
Then again, Huffington is wisely confining her site mostly to politics. It's safer, after all, for liberals to bash the government than Hollywood.
I wish Arianna the best of luck in this endeavor, but I doubt her and her "star-studded" cast are going to be able to handle the rigors of dealing in the blogosphere. Arianna is such a left-wing nut that she can't openly debate in any public forum (See the highlight reels of her on Hannity & Colmes for a laugh), nor do I think she'll have the intellectual superiority that the best of the Left-center blogosphere has to offer. She'll never touch Mickey Kaus' shoes.
But hey, more power to her. She thinks she can tackle the bloggers, go right on ahead. Better people have tried. But we will always have a place on our wall for her head too. So just a quick reminder to Arianna: If you screw up, if you make ANY false allegations, "if you use an aerosol can in a manner other than directed", I don't care...We will nail you.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/
And for those of you who have been following the "Talking Points Memo" fiasco started by ABC, Hindrocket on PowerLine has posted an update. Howard Kurtz, of the Washington Post tries to explain their position on the memos, kind of. See, the Post picked up with the story that ABC presented, and ran with it. Since then, it's been spin, after denial, after "no comment" from those at the Post.
The flap about a Washington Post report on an unsigned strategy memo in the Terri Schiavo case, which the paper said was "distributed to Republican senators," isn't going away.
It turns out that The Post's news service put out an early version of the March 20 story -- published by numerous other papers -- that said the talking points, which touted the Schiavo case as a political opportunity, were "distributed to Republican senators by party leaders." GOP congressional leaders say they never saw the document, whose author remains unknown. Post reporter Mike Allen, who was unaware the news service had distributed the earlier version, said last week that the paper was careful not to say it was "a Republican memo."
Kate Carlisle, the news service's managing editor, says Allen's report was sent out at 9:07 the night before and "we weren't notified that changes had been made to the story after we got it." Despite criticism from bloggers, and Allen's request for a correction, Carlisle said no correction was warranted. Late Friday, the news service sent out an "advisory" saying: "The version of the article published by the paper did not specify the authorship and noted that the memo was unsigned. The authorship remains unknown." The advisory did not retract the assertion that "party leaders" had given out the memo.
So, PowerLine and Michelle Malkin (http://michellemalkin.com/) were right. The Post did run the story that directly implicated the GOP and it's leadership in this memo. ABC hasn't stepped forward with where they got it from. The Post admits that they don't know who wrote it. Sure, they "noted" that it was unsigned. And as for the "the paper did not specify the authorship" spin, it's a lie. Below is an excerpt from the Seattle Times. Right before the article is a "disclaimer" printed by the Times.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002213728_memo20.html
A Washington Post report March 20 on the Terri Schiavo case said a memo mentioning political benefits of congressional intervention was "distributed to Republican senators by party leaders." The version of the article published later by the paper did not specify authorship and noted that the memo was unsigned. The authorship remains unknown.
GOP memo says issue offers political rewards
By The Washington Post
WASHINGTON — Republican leaders believe their attention to the Terri Schiavo issue could pay dividends with Christian conservatives whose support they covet in the 2006 midterm elections, according to a GOP memo intended to be seen only by senators.
The one-page memo, distributed to Republican senators by party leaders, called the debate over Schiavo legislation "a great political issue" that would appeal to the party's base, or core, supporters. The memo singled out Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., who is up for re-election next year.
Sure seems like the Post let this one out. The byline states that the story originated from the Post. The leveled the same allegation that ABC did. The difference is that ABC has backed away as far as possible on this issue. The Post picked it up and ran with it.
And Carlisle's spin that they weren't informed of any changes, but in truth the story was right, eerily rings familiar with the Rather spin of "fake, but accurate". There should be, at the very least, a correction printed by the Post on this. This is a level of journalistic ineptitude that is starting to rear it's ugly head in everyday practices. And one would think that after "Rathergate" that the media would be paying closer attention to it's job. Obviously it hasn't, and that means we, as bloggers, still have a full plate to deal with.
Here's my big gripe about the media. As a blogger, I have to be accurate. I'm accountable to my readers. If I make a mistake, and refuse to correct it, my readers will do one of two things. They will either quit reading my thoughts, which is unacceptable in this medium. (I refuse to be reduced to the level of a slobbering conspiracy nut) Or, they will crucify me, as many of my readers are bloggers themselves, or columnists that comment on much of what Marcie and I do comment on.
When the media pulls a stunt like this, like "Rathergate", like "Eason's Fables", like Howell Raines piss-poor management of the New York Times, it gets swept under the carpet. It's a mistake, oh well, so what. The media reminds me of a quote from a movie called "The Paper". It wasn't a bad movie, but it had a key line in it that sticks with me today.
"We taint them today. We make them look good on Saturday, and everyone's happy."
I don't "taint". I report. I comment. And a lot of people agree, I'm right on the money when I do blog. It's that important to both of us to be as accurate when we blog as possible. We owe that much to our readers.
Publius II
This one comes from Drudge, and I had to laugh when I first read about this.
In a move unlikely only because it's taken this long to happen, pundit-about-town Arianna Huffington is extending her hosting largess to the blogosphere.
This month the wannabe California governor is launching a Slate-like Web site where a cast of bigwigs, including Sen. Jon Corzine (D-N.J.), David Geffen, Barry Diller, Larry David, Tom Freston, Ari Emanuel, Jim Wiatt, Tina Brown and Harold Evans will each have their own blog from which to spout Big Thoughts about politics.
Huffington wouldn't comment, but it was confirmed that a soft-launch of the Huffington Report would be up and running before the end of April.
It will be interesting to see how these honchos fare in the Wild West of the 'Net, where contentious, or even off-hand remarks are seized upon within seconds by millions and held up for debate (and often scorn) on scores of Web sites. Or even if Diller or Geffen will actually type their thoughts.
Unlike corporations, the Internet does not provide legions of publicists and spinmeisters to keep the public at bay.
Then again, Huffington is wisely confining her site mostly to politics. It's safer, after all, for liberals to bash the government than Hollywood.
I wish Arianna the best of luck in this endeavor, but I doubt her and her "star-studded" cast are going to be able to handle the rigors of dealing in the blogosphere. Arianna is such a left-wing nut that she can't openly debate in any public forum (See the highlight reels of her on Hannity & Colmes for a laugh), nor do I think she'll have the intellectual superiority that the best of the Left-center blogosphere has to offer. She'll never touch Mickey Kaus' shoes.
But hey, more power to her. She thinks she can tackle the bloggers, go right on ahead. Better people have tried. But we will always have a place on our wall for her head too. So just a quick reminder to Arianna: If you screw up, if you make ANY false allegations, "if you use an aerosol can in a manner other than directed", I don't care...We will nail you.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/
And for those of you who have been following the "Talking Points Memo" fiasco started by ABC, Hindrocket on PowerLine has posted an update. Howard Kurtz, of the Washington Post tries to explain their position on the memos, kind of. See, the Post picked up with the story that ABC presented, and ran with it. Since then, it's been spin, after denial, after "no comment" from those at the Post.
The flap about a Washington Post report on an unsigned strategy memo in the Terri Schiavo case, which the paper said was "distributed to Republican senators," isn't going away.
It turns out that The Post's news service put out an early version of the March 20 story -- published by numerous other papers -- that said the talking points, which touted the Schiavo case as a political opportunity, were "distributed to Republican senators by party leaders." GOP congressional leaders say they never saw the document, whose author remains unknown. Post reporter Mike Allen, who was unaware the news service had distributed the earlier version, said last week that the paper was careful not to say it was "a Republican memo."
Kate Carlisle, the news service's managing editor, says Allen's report was sent out at 9:07 the night before and "we weren't notified that changes had been made to the story after we got it." Despite criticism from bloggers, and Allen's request for a correction, Carlisle said no correction was warranted. Late Friday, the news service sent out an "advisory" saying: "The version of the article published by the paper did not specify the authorship and noted that the memo was unsigned. The authorship remains unknown." The advisory did not retract the assertion that "party leaders" had given out the memo.
So, PowerLine and Michelle Malkin (http://michellemalkin.com/) were right. The Post did run the story that directly implicated the GOP and it's leadership in this memo. ABC hasn't stepped forward with where they got it from. The Post admits that they don't know who wrote it. Sure, they "noted" that it was unsigned. And as for the "the paper did not specify the authorship" spin, it's a lie. Below is an excerpt from the Seattle Times. Right before the article is a "disclaimer" printed by the Times.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002213728_memo20.html
A Washington Post report March 20 on the Terri Schiavo case said a memo mentioning political benefits of congressional intervention was "distributed to Republican senators by party leaders." The version of the article published later by the paper did not specify authorship and noted that the memo was unsigned. The authorship remains unknown.
GOP memo says issue offers political rewards
By The Washington Post
WASHINGTON — Republican leaders believe their attention to the Terri Schiavo issue could pay dividends with Christian conservatives whose support they covet in the 2006 midterm elections, according to a GOP memo intended to be seen only by senators.
The one-page memo, distributed to Republican senators by party leaders, called the debate over Schiavo legislation "a great political issue" that would appeal to the party's base, or core, supporters. The memo singled out Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., who is up for re-election next year.
Sure seems like the Post let this one out. The byline states that the story originated from the Post. The leveled the same allegation that ABC did. The difference is that ABC has backed away as far as possible on this issue. The Post picked it up and ran with it.
And Carlisle's spin that they weren't informed of any changes, but in truth the story was right, eerily rings familiar with the Rather spin of "fake, but accurate". There should be, at the very least, a correction printed by the Post on this. This is a level of journalistic ineptitude that is starting to rear it's ugly head in everyday practices. And one would think that after "Rathergate" that the media would be paying closer attention to it's job. Obviously it hasn't, and that means we, as bloggers, still have a full plate to deal with.
Here's my big gripe about the media. As a blogger, I have to be accurate. I'm accountable to my readers. If I make a mistake, and refuse to correct it, my readers will do one of two things. They will either quit reading my thoughts, which is unacceptable in this medium. (I refuse to be reduced to the level of a slobbering conspiracy nut) Or, they will crucify me, as many of my readers are bloggers themselves, or columnists that comment on much of what Marcie and I do comment on.
When the media pulls a stunt like this, like "Rathergate", like "Eason's Fables", like Howell Raines piss-poor management of the New York Times, it gets swept under the carpet. It's a mistake, oh well, so what. The media reminds me of a quote from a movie called "The Paper". It wasn't a bad movie, but it had a key line in it that sticks with me today.
"We taint them today. We make them look good on Saturday, and everyone's happy."
I don't "taint". I report. I comment. And a lot of people agree, I'm right on the money when I do blog. It's that important to both of us to be as accurate when we blog as possible. We owe that much to our readers.
Publius II
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 11:22 AM
3 Comments:
Thomas,
Good post, though do we really need to bring up the SECOND Wicked Witch of the Left Coast?
As for the memo flap, The Post had better do something soon. Either dropping the story with a correction and an apology, or coming clean and doing what ABC hasn't done, which is reveal where they got the memo from.
I still think that ABC still has some explaining to do.
Marcie
Guys,
Good post. Huffington is certifiable. My wife wants me to apply for the new opening at Drudge.
You are right on about the blogosphere. Instant accountability is the name of the game. I always chuckle when I hear someon say that blogs are "unregulated." Obviously they don't have one or have never been wrong.
Great blog. Keep it up.
Aside from the fact that she had the brains to mary a billionaire and take a good portion of his inheritance away from him - she is a moron. Spent millions in the recall and got less than 1% of the vote. She may take a few from Wonkette but other than that her site will get few hits.
Rod Stanton
Post a Comment
<< Home