Slashdot Mirror
Bloggers - Beowolf Cluster of Fact Checkers?
d3ik writes "Wired has an interesting take on bloggers role in journalism and politics. I've never been comfortable with news discussions sites being called blogs... but I guess "news discussion sites" isn't as catchy. Anyway, the article makes some good points on the role of bloggers in fact-checking (read: tearing apart) some of the stories and claims that the huddled masses would normally take as fact."
Now that Dan Rather went out on a limb and got burned, nobody else is going to go out on a limb. That means that nobody is ever going to ask Mr. Bush where the WMD are, where Osama is, how many have to die, did you really do coke at Camp David, and why the hell aren't we doing anything about the Sudan, Iran, or North Korea?
I've made the point before (here and here) that that is exactly what was intended.
Karl Rove is a sneaky, underhanded devil, and darned proud of it. I think he's behind the whole forgery scam, and you don't have to be an Underpants Gnome to see the pattern:
1. Fax obvious forgery to CBS. The 24-hour news cycle ensures its publication.
2. Wait for right-wing bloggers to "expose" the forgery, and thereby discredit the "liberal media".
3. ???
4. ELECTION!
I'm afraid that Rove knows how to use the "blogosphere" (another ridiculous term with no reasonable synonym) to his advantage. It's second nature to him, really -- the book Bush's Brain documents how Rove used the old-school equivalent to get Baby Bush elected Governor in Texas. Back then, it was a matter of spreading whispers through the East Texas cafes and barber shops. Now, it's even easier.
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
Well, I like to think that what I consider to be fact is indeed synonymous with truth, but then that's me doing the thinking...
And come on, "truth" is even more subjective than "facts". At least people who throw "facts" around like to pretend that there's a preponderance of evidence to support their position. "Truth" is something religions talk about, for crying out loud. I mean, ask the Heaven's Gate folks about the "truth". Ask the Branch Davidians. Ask the Jim Jones-ers.
If anything, "truth" is even more subjective than "facts" are. (Unless it's *my* truth, of course...)
Hence Democracy.
They will never stop until somebody makes the
The release of the fake documents was _not_ due to the 24 hour news cycle. It was shoddy journalism. We now know that at least two of the four experts CBS conferred with questioned it's authenticity. 60 Minutes alumni such as Morley Safer and Andy Rooney have gone on the record saying they would not have run the story.
Furthermore, you hadly have to be right-wing to want to "expose" (why is this in quotes? are you suggesting right wing bloggers knew ahead of time Rove faked these?) the document as fake. Anybody without a left-wing slant could buy into why they were phony. This group includes: people with a right wing slant, moderates, left wing people not blinded by ideology.
As far as discrediting the "left wing media" (there's those quotes again), If Rather wanted to believe those documents so bad that we was willing forego journalistic rigor, he deserves to be discredited. My turn for quotes: If we play devil's advocate and assume Rove was really behind this, his plan wouldn't have progressed an inch if any professional "journalism" was taking place at CBS.
One last thing. Rove is noted for this kind of thing, and it's at least plausible that he really was behind it, I won't deny that. But that doesn't let CBS off the hook or indict "right wing" bloggers.