Blogger Ethics Panels! Gatekeeping!

How will we know who’s really writing the stories with all those anonymous people on the Internet commenting under names likeDoTheDougie36?

Journatic CEO Brian Timpone saysfake bylines were often used for the company’s Blockshopper.com real estate stories, and clients — including the Chicago Tribune — asked to run those pieces on their hyperlocal sites. Journatic said that was okay, but never removed — or apparently told clients about — the made-up bylines.

“It was an oversight on our part — we should have addressed that,” Timpone tells the Chicago Tribune’s Robert Channick.

I swear to God, nothing ever annoyed me so much as the “real name” argument back in the early days of political blogging like 4,000 years ago. Because it was like pseudonyms didn’t exist, I mean, like people really thought Mark Twain was Mark Twain. Like we’d never had this argument at least a hundred times a day.

Now, consistency in a pseudonym can be important, as in sockpuppeting and whatnot, but acting like using a fake name was some kind of brand-new Internet Thing that invalidated any argument the person with the fake name was making was just stupid. It harkened back to the same attack establishment journalism tried to make on the Internet in the first place, that We’re Just Better Because We Are, regardless of the actual factual truth of anything.

I don’t care what you call yourself. I care what you say. Can your statement be verified in any way? Do you link back to your sources, so that I can see them for myself? Do you make analysis that is borne out by actual events? Or do you regularly say stuff that is monumentally full of shit, such that the only meaning your name has is to signal me to flip right on by you? I don’t care what you call yourself then, and neither does anybody else, because it’s over.

So let’s stop acting like there’s something sacred about names divorced from what those names are saying, especially when shit like this Journatic clusterfuck happens, proving that sainted traditional journalism is no better at this than anybody else.

A.

3 thoughts on “Blogger Ethics Panels! Gatekeeping!

  1. Jude says:

    It’s like these fuckfaces never heard of “Publius,” “Cato,” and “Brutus.” Morons.

  2. mass says:

    Oh dear dog, I was watching Morning Mika a couple of hours ago, and there was dear “Mr. News Analyst” Mark Halperin being asked about Romney surrogate, Eric “Etch A Sketch” Fehrnstrom, who got penned down in an interview by that hard-hitting stud Chuck Todd.
    Fehrnstrom couldn’t and wouldn’t call any penalty a tax. That would suggest that Romney raised a tax when he was governor, and there is no greater sin than taxing people to pay for shit…It’s a fee, cuz I sez so, that’s why.
    Halperin basically says that if Fehrnstrom couldn’t come out and just tell the truth about Romneycare/Obamacare, he just shoulda responded to Chuck Todd with better spin or a better lie.
    That’s it. Halperin was judging the performance, and he seemed disappointed that Chuck Todd, as dim as he is, wouldn’t let the lying fucker off the hook. And nobody on this morning’s show would so rude to point t the FACT that Fehrnstrom was trying to lie his ass off.
    That’s when a “journalist” jumps completely into the Village, never to soil himself again in the pursuit of “truth.” It’s pursuit of cocktail party invites from now on for Halperin!
    What’s the truth to Halperin? He couldn’t give a fuck. He was grading the performance of a hack surrogate who was asked a direct question from Halperin’s supposed NEWS colleague Chuck Todd. Halperin seemed to feel bad that the guy couldn’t successfully lie/spin his way out of the interview.
    MSNBC. Liberal network my ass. Just more Villager Idiot Whores.

  3. Wait a minute, Betty Crocker didn’t write a cook book?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: