C&L

While a big fan of Crooks and Liars, I found the following comment/question to be a dark commentary on the state of U.S. journalism. In response to an alleged statement from a White House reporter regarding the absurdity of partisan bloggery, C&L asked:

"While it's clear that there are some in the media that inject their own biases into stories, and there are some flat out lazy journalists, is it dishonest of us to ascribe more malevolent motives when we don't see stories covered the way we think they should be?"

Translation: Is it dishonest of a blogger to subjectively speculate regarding the cause or intent of a journalist's actions when that journalist's reporting doesn't conform to the blogger's subjective worldview?

It's not dishonest. It's just bad journalism, but that's no big deal unless bloggers seek greater presence and credibility in the mix of U.S. media. If so, well, biased hackery is biased hackery - doesn't matter what the underlying ideology is. If everyone gets journalism delivered to them in their own personal frame of reference, then it's no longer journalism. It's custom entertainment.