Comments on: Skube vs. Marshall and the LA Times’ editorial kabuki

By: Don Lowell

Don Lowell — Sun, 02 Sep 2007 02:17:08 +0000

Iv’e followed Talking Points on a daily basis for about 2 years and find him a hell of a lot more accurate than say the NY Times, Wash. Post. One can tell he makes a point to be accurate.

Lindy

By: David Edelstein

David Edelstein — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 15:03:46 +0000

Paul Lukasiak (above) called it. The issue now becomes bigger than laziness and hypocrisy. This is about a right-winger and the newspaper that banners him attempting to discredit a medium that has the potential to dig deep and make noise. When the only loud voices were druggie Rush Limbaugh’s and such columnists as Robert Novak, you didn’t hear a peep from Skube…

By: contentious.com - links for 2007-08-23

contentious.com - links for 2007-08-23 — Thu, 23 Aug 2007 19:19:43 +0000

[...] Scott Rosenberg’s Wordyard » Blog Archive » Skube vs. Marshall and the LA Times’ editorial kab… “LA Times won’t correct the op-ed. But Skube’s argument “blogs such as Josh Marshall’s don’t do real reporting” is widely known to be false.” (tags: blogs journalism controversy newspapers) [...]

By: Anna

Anna — Thu, 23 Aug 2007 18:41:05 +0000

at the risk of sounding like a dittohead -that was fine.

By: Wayne Dickson

Wayne Dickson — Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:42:59 +0000

Yes, hoist by his own petard! Well done.

As an academic myself, I’d like to emphasize that this is not just lazy and dishonest journalism; it’s also lazy and dishonest “professoring.” If I saw something like this while serving on a tenure/promotion committee, I’d treat it as serious.

By: paul_lukasiak

paul_lukasiak — Thu, 23 Aug 2007 16:53:58 +0000

what struck me about Newton’s note is that of the websites that it decries

1) are all left-of-center

2) 3 ouf 4 are written by people who are paid/earn a living through blogging, the fourth is a “for-profit” group blog.

3) these blogs are far from “partisan” — while all are “left of center”, they do not refrain from criticizing Democrats when such criticism is called for (e.g. the massive amount of criticism of the Democratic leadership’s role in the passage of the FISA revisions.)

This raises serious questions regarding the editorial staff of the LA Times — it would appear that they had a “partisan”/ideological agenda in providing the names of the blogs involved.

By: Stewart Huntington

Stewart Huntington — Thu, 23 Aug 2007 15:32:18 +0000

Scott,

Nothing like a little irony with my moring java. (Found your peice via Romenesko).

Can a critique get any better than when it uses the critiquee’s own words agin him? Nay.

Nice to read your stuff after so many years since 110 5th Street.

Cheers from an old colleague,

Stewart

Stewart Huntington
Publisher
Black Hills Pioneer