The media kerfuffle

• Article
• Comments ()
• Click-2-Listen
• Videos

By

Add "salivating morons" to the mainstream media's growing canon of stupid things to say about the ever-vigilant bloggers. Steve Lovelady, managing editor of the Columbia Journalism Review, the self-styled flagship of journalism, said this in the fallout of CNN chief news executive Eason Jordan's resignation on Friday: "The salivating morons who make up the lynch mob prevail." Add also, as loath as we are to do so, the Wall Street Journal's editorial comment from yesterday that professional journalism, of which it proclaims membership, is much better than "the enthusiasms and vendettas of amateurs."

As a general rule, we greatly admire the WSJ's editorial page, but we were a little disappointed to see this editorial yesterday, "The Jordan Kerfuffle," side with the mainstream liberal media -- which, by the way, has been perfectly happy over the years to harvest conservative heads. Indeed, the New York Times published a similar story yesterday, suggesting that what Mr. Jordan said in Davos, Switzerland, was only a kerfuffle. Since we've been following the Jordan scandal from the start, we're quite sure on whose side, professionally speaking, we fall.

Throughout the "kerfuffle," we have attempted to keep our readers informed about what Mr. Jordan said and why it mattered. To do so, we relied heavily on the fine reporting done by the blogosphere: Jim Geraghty of National Review Online, Edward Morrissey of Captain's Quarters, John Hinderaker and Scott Johnson of Power Line, Michelle Malkin and numerous others. A few mainstream folks jumped on board as well, including the New York Post, the New York Sun, Investor's Business Daily, Michael Barone of U.S. News & World Report and Lawrence Kudlow. Even the Examiner, Washington's newest daily, ran an editorial yesterday.

The meme among those outlets that didn't provide coverage is that the bloggers were on a headhunting spree, when in fact very few called for Mr. Jordan's immediate resignation. If any underlying theme could be found, it is called truth-hunting -- and CNN had an obligation to get it. When influential members of the media defame our troops, they should answer for it. If that's moronic, sign us up.

We also can't understand the WSJ's dismissal of the bloggers as "amateurs." At least CNN, or perhaps Mr. Jordan, felt the bloggers' reporting to be important enough to warrant the resignation of their top news executive. After all, this isn't the first time the bloggers have been proved right.

The Wall Street Journal stands on the wrong side of the barricades in this battle, despite the fact that the mainstream media got beat badly by the morons -- again.