Squeal when caught

The Eason Jordan, now ex-CNN News Chief, case provided a great deal of information about such issues as accountability and the hubris of many folks in the MSM. There were some delicious quotes from otherwise respected journalists of good repute who seem to completely miss the whole idea of peer review. The professor noted this.

Of course, unedited presumes that there are no standards, no metrics for quality whatsoever. I don’t think that’s true. If you aren’t making reasonable arguments, if you aren’t backing up your claims with links, I just don’t think you’ll ultimately be able to hold an audience or have an impact. [ What a Difference a Word Makes Ranting Profs 14fb05]

Perhaps what is really missing is a trust and respect for the end audience by the MSM? Could it be that all those voices out there, outside the established channels, have something to say? Could it be that those who read many different views and sound out many different rationales can choose which ones have merit and which don’t?

Comments are closed.