Attackers Become the Attacked

The Washington Post reporters who took down President Nixon changed the image of journalists from news reporters to law enforcers. (I sometimes wonder, though, if Nixon were a Democrat, would Watergate have brought him down?)

Thirty years later, the bloggers now do to the the same to reporters. Katharine Seelyes has a nice summary of recent events in a New York Times story Bloggers as news media trophy hunters hosted at CNET.

Fascinating what happens with this new form of reporting opens the aperture wide open, and hundreds of de facto experts-turned-reporters are unleashed to examine every aspect of a story -- in a way that traditional reporters, who are experts in almost nothing, have failed.

(Point of irritation: this morning I read an item about Shaw, one of two major cable operators in Western Canada, starting digital phone service in Calgary, Alberta. The article, by Canadian Press, noted that this would be a challenge to the local telephone monopoly of Bell Canada. Sorry, but Bell Canada's monopoly is local to Central Canada -- Ontario and Quebec; Telus has the monopoly in Alberta.)

I recently finished reading "We the Media. Grassroots journalism by the people, for the people" by Dan Gillmor. It was a bit of a disappointment; it read more like a primer for the clueless (so save your money and read it free online). Still, I was reassured to read a mention of a Washington DC blogger who specializes in plumbing the depths of obscure public documents.

Comments

(I sometimes wonder, though, if Nixon were a Democrat, would Watergate have brought him down?)

- if Clinton were a republican, would he have been impeached?

(I sometimes wonder, though, if Nixon were a Democrat, would Watergate have brought him down?)

Would a Democrat - JFK or Bobby, for example - have done the things Crazy Dick did? Or Reagan's Iran-Contra adventures? Or the shenannigans over WMD in Iraq? Enron? "Jeff Gannon"/JD Guckert? Where do Republicans stop getting a free pass these days?

[ralphg]

The editor replies:

These are all interesting things to speculate over. What if Dietrich Bonhoffer's assination plot against Adolf Hitler had succeeded? What if Lenin had stayed in Switzerland? Et cetera.

[Anon]

"The editor replies:

These are all interesting things to speculate over. What if Dietrich Bonhoffer's assination plot against Adolf Hitler had succeeded? What if Lenin had stayed in Switzerland? Et cetera."

Well then, why the hell did you bring this kind of political commentary into your post in the first place?

[ralph grabowski]

>Well then, why the h**l did you bring
>this kind of political commentary
>into your post in the first place?

A. This is my Weblog. I can post whatever I want.

B. If you want a Weblog where topics are verbotten, then start it up: "The Weblog Where It Is Impermissable to Discuss Certain Topics I Feel Uncomfortable About"

C. At least I have an open mind, one that likes to speculate on topics, such as:
- What might have been?
- What could be?
- Why do we think the way we do?
- Why do certain thots enrage us?
- Why are certain topics taboo in different periods of history?

D. And, I don't hide behind boring names like "Anon." I am brave enough to state my thoughts with my name attached -- unlike like you cowards, who try to shut down conversions you disapprove of. You moralist! Who put you in charge of the Thought Police? Fascist wanna-be, show yourself!!! I bet your mother still changes your diaper!!! I spit in your general direction!!!! Your father was a cocker spaniel, your mother was a....