Wednesday, February 16, 2005
More Easongate Posturing
The posturing continues all over the Internet about Easongate. The line seems to go that bloggers were not engaged in journalism, but simple head-hunting.
The initial blogging leader on this story, Hugh Hewitt, certainly was engaged in journalism, as were the usual suspects, Captain's Quarters, Easongate, Michelle Malkin, et. al. When Hugh points this out on his numerous media appearances lately on the subject, the refrain is that they grant the front line bloggers journalistic status, but not us little guys, we really were head-hunting.
As I general statement, I do not accept that, but in this specific instance, I will -- I was head-hunting. I think this is a perfectly legitimate blogging function in some cases.
Eason Jordan had a job that required public trust. Long gone are the days that a television journalist could change the course of a war ala' Walter Cronkite -- Thank God that level of public trust is gone. But it is still necessary to have some level of trust between the news gatherers and readers and the public.
At Davos, Jordan eroded that trust significantly. Even if he did try to modify and retract the worst part of his assertions on the spot. The fact that such an accusation was his first instinct eroded this particular member of the public's trust enormously. When the revelations about Portugal came forward it was no longer a matter of eroding trust -- it was gone.
When the trust was eroded, he could no longer do his job effectively. That's why I sang out. When the trust was gone, CNN had no choice. No trust, no viewers. No viewers, no advertising. No advertising, no money. Now they REALLY have no choice.
Yeah -- I was headhunting and I'm, proud of it. I'll defend it to the end.
The initial blogging leader on this story, Hugh Hewitt, certainly was engaged in journalism, as were the usual suspects, Captain's Quarters, Easongate, Michelle Malkin, et. al. When Hugh points this out on his numerous media appearances lately on the subject, the refrain is that they grant the front line bloggers journalistic status, but not us little guys, we really were head-hunting.
As I general statement, I do not accept that, but in this specific instance, I will -- I was head-hunting. I think this is a perfectly legitimate blogging function in some cases.
Eason Jordan had a job that required public trust. Long gone are the days that a television journalist could change the course of a war ala' Walter Cronkite -- Thank God that level of public trust is gone. But it is still necessary to have some level of trust between the news gatherers and readers and the public.
At Davos, Jordan eroded that trust significantly. Even if he did try to modify and retract the worst part of his assertions on the spot. The fact that such an accusation was his first instinct eroded this particular member of the public's trust enormously. When the revelations about Portugal came forward it was no longer a matter of eroding trust -- it was gone.
When the trust was eroded, he could no longer do his job effectively. That's why I sang out. When the trust was gone, CNN had no choice. No trust, no viewers. No viewers, no advertising. No advertising, no money. Now they REALLY have no choice.
Yeah -- I was headhunting and I'm, proud of it. I'll defend it to the end.
