(this was supposed to be posted on Friday afternoon)
The only thing that I find shocking about this "Dean Paid Bloggers! / Armstrong Williams isn't the Only Sellout" echo chamber entry [wsj] is that some members of the the Dean campaign expected to be able to buy positive weblog coverage by hiring people as consultants.
That is, I don't think any of the parties did anything wrong, but it casts the "people-powered revolution" in something of a different light. I find it more than a little disappointing.
But, what the hell? I found most of the presidential campaign supremely disappointing. This is just a silly, distracting footnote.
--
That said, I think that calls for transparency are completely valid. I hope that this is something that the weblog community can get right.
That is, I don't think any of the parties did anything wrong, but it casts the "people-powered revolution" in something of a different light. I find it more than a little disappointing.
But, what the hell? I found most of the presidential campaign supremely disappointing. This is just a silly, distracting footnote.
--
That said, I think that calls for transparency are completely valid. I hope that this is something that the weblog community can get right.
jerome stopped blogging & markos had a clear disclaimer at the top - the call for transparency is disingenuous & would only have meant something if the media had been this passionate after thune's campaign admitted to specifically paying two bloggers for positive material.
the worst thing i've seen come of this whole mess is that the journal fabricated one of the quotes in order to get a different dean campaign member to respond.
Even if some of the calls for transparency are disingenuous, I still think that it's a valid point that will be come increasingly important as more and more people try to use the medium to their advantage. [Jerome] Armstrong and Zuniga did the right thing in this case. I think that such disclosures/disclaimers should be standard.
My guess is that Zephyr really believes in this and was naive about how it would come across as helping the other side.