|
:: Monday, December 06, 2004 ::
Mr. Blacker:
Thanks for your response to my Friday Daily Ablution post.
As some of my readers were kind enough to point out, the "man with a successful weblog" to whom you referred in your Friday column is a former Supreme Court clerk, currently a UCLA law professor and an acknowledged expert on free speech/press issues - a status which would appear to gives his views on the subject more credence than those of "those arts graduates who couldn’t get into the BBC," as one commenter put it.
Indeed, your readers are forced into one of two conclusons - either that you didn't bother to find out who the "man with a successful weblog" was, or that you deliberately withheld this very pertinent information from your readers.
While neither of these conclusions does much to support your contention that publishing "news and views" should be left to professional journalists like yourself, many of my readers remain curious as to whether you were simply too lazy to do two minutes of research, or whether you're guilty of dishonesty through omission.
Which is it?
I'm convinced Scott Burgess is a genius--sure hope Santa is reading his blog.
Related: JustOneMinute analyzes a slipshod column by "professional journalist" Katherine Seelye of the NY Times.
:: Max 5:12 PM [+] ::
...
|