tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9908604.post114521204745784140..comments2024-03-01T00:27:42.852-08:00Comments on Hammer Of The Blogs: Rage Against The Media MachineHeywood J.http://www.blogger.com/profile/05627748699423939682noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9908604.post-1145330258522158452006-04-17T20:17:00.000-07:002006-04-17T20:17:00.000-07:00I don't think Jane would have let them in the hous...I don't think Jane would have let them in the house. <BR/><BR/>It's becoming clearer to me that the Washington Post and other major outlets don't know blog from bulgogi. Maybe because I get my news nearly wholesale from the blogosphere, I've errantly assumed everyone does. Nope. The blogosphere is still a nascent phenomenon, attracting a very small amount of the total population. <BR/><BR/>I am still not sure what motivates the Post et al to engage blogs-curiosity, or malice. If they wanted to do a slash job on the left blogosphere, they could have chosen someone else-looking at Maryscott's blog, I'm not seeing a whole lot of rancor and vitriol, frankly. I could look left and right to find blogs that were nastier if the subject was "The Blogosphere is angry!!!" But, I guess it all depends on how familiar one is with the blogosphere as a whole, or what political persuasion you are of when you first engage that shapes your impressions. Having been on both sides of the political aisle, I can put the attitudes in perspective-perhaps the Post is not at that point yet. That they spend so much time cultivating our attention counts for something, though.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9908604.post-1145329261413902582006-04-17T20:01:00.000-07:002006-04-17T20:01:00.000-07:00Right, Pooh. It's easier for them to just tar ever...Right, Pooh. It's easier for them to just tar everyone with the same broad brush. The thing is -- and this is where Billmon's take on this comes into play for me -- is that all this time I have primarily assumed a certain level of the usual strains of institutional incompetence and perhaps misguided attempts at social climbing within the power structure of the milieu that the <I>Post</I> in particular operates. They are money-grubbing shills, beholden to the usual trappings of power, yada yada.<BR/><BR/>But Billmon's thesis is much less byzantine, much more close to home I think. It's nothing more than a good ol' fashioned pushback. Why they picked O'Connor in particular rather than go after Hamsher specifically, who knows. You're probably right. Whatever the case, it's much greatere than simple incompetence or endemic corruption. It's now malfeasance on an almost criminal (for people who still want to pretend to be serious journamalists, anyway) level.<BR/><BR/>For an added bonus, if you haven't already, check out Maryscott O'Connor's take on the whole thing. Better yet, check out Mahablog's take, and check out her link to conservatard blog My Pet Jawa. Those motherfuckers are on glue; they seriously think Finkel was <I>sympathetic</I> to O'Connor's (and thus to all "angry unhinged libruls") cause. Truly through the looking glass, these people.Heywood J.https://www.blogger.com/profile/05627748699423939682noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9908604.post-1145321927015720192006-04-17T17:58:00.000-07:002006-04-17T17:58:00.000-07:00Methinks billmon correct. The Post couldn't come s...Methinks billmon correct. The Post couldn't come straight out and smear Jane Hamsher (because she bites back rather fiercely), so they used Maryscott O'Connor as a proxy.Poohhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10088628100700088755noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9908604.post-1145238328949644582006-04-16T18:45:00.000-07:002006-04-16T18:45:00.000-07:00"pajamahadeen" - LOL! pure comedy gold."pajamahadeen" - LOL! pure comedy gold.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com