Laura Vanderkam in the Washington Examiner writes on how blogs are shattering the arrogance of the Columbia Journalism Review and why that’s good for journalism. CJR Executive Editor Mike Hoyt’s lame response does little more than highlight the arrogance he’s trying to argue doesn’t exist.
Part of Hoyt’s response to the charge that they are jealous of blogs is that they have a blog – CJRDaily. Or course you’d expect such a place to be all over the Eason Jordan story, right? Wrong.
Not a very good week for the MSM. First Eason Jordan, then Powerline goes after Moyers, and now this! I love it.
Lame response? Kevin, you are far too kind! I haven’t forgotten the hatchet job CJR did on the Swift Boat Vets, either. Would you believe that in my student days, I suscribed to the CJR. My have times changed.
Oh, good article on Moyers by Powerline. Any chance that the Star Tribune would print Watts letter to Moyers? I doubt it.
This particular paragraph caught my attention in the Examiner piece:
And here I thought the bloggers were trying to make sure that the media was reporting the facts accurately, instead of injecting their usual blather and opinion into stories.
The CJR “response” was essentially an inside joke, targeted at those who already have taken CJR’s side. *Yawn*