American media vs the blogs
Bloggers-Truth-tellers or vigilantes? Trophy-hunters or watchdogs?
With the abrupt resignation of CNN chief news executive Eason Jordan, the American media are struggling with how to respond to bloggers.
Some see the bloggers as an explosion of free speech, a democratic counterbalance to media arrogance and a much needed call for greater transparency in the media, while others see bloggers as vigilante partisans bent on discrediting and destroying the media.
The furore was touched off after bloggers questioned comments Mr Jordan made at the World Economic Forum in Davos Switzerland about journalists killed in Iraq.
At the forum, he said that he believed that several journalists had been targeted by the military.
He was quickly challenged by many at the forum who thought he was implying that it was official US policy to target journalists.
Mr Jordan qualified his statements saying that he was trying to differentiate between journalists who died as a result of being at the wrong place at the wrong time and those who were mistaken for the enemy.
The salivating morons who make up the lynch mob prevail.
Steve Lovelady, managing editor, Columbia Journalism Review
World Economic Forum policy is that all sessions are off the record, but blogger Rony Abovitz posted Mr Jordan's comments on a forum sanctioned website.
Bloggers quickly set up a site calling for a release a transcript of the session, and Mr Jordan found himself in the middle of a blogswarm as the online pressure intensified.
Mr Jordan attempted to qualify his comments publicly, but it was too late, and Mr Jordan abruptly resigned.
Return to internet news headlines
View Internet News Archive