The notion of a "blogger ethics panel" is a sort of big inside joke, and it's a nice snarky comeback when people in the traditional media wail over the tone or reliability of some content from the "fever swamps." After all, it's not as though members of the traditional press, especially the political press, have any sort of actual leg to stand on.
And so fair enough. Joe Klein doesn't get to lecture Atrios. Reasonable people agree.
However, I have an issue in that I don't really want Joe Klein as my yardstick. I like reading blogs, and I do it because there's real information there. As this is the first political cycle where the medium will be fully embraced (even Hillary comes out swinging with live webcasts), I expect we'll see a lot of trickery.
And that's a shame. It's a shame that people who carry the title blogfather will go and say things like:
As a historical note, I was semi-involved with the Draft Clark effort. Markos and I had formed a consultancy group in January of 2003. I liked Dean; he Clark. We agreed that whichever hired us first we'd both work together on that campaign.
After they were hired, Jerome did not disclaim, but promoted Dean heavily. Markos posted that he did "some technical work for Howard Dean," while helping to spread the word as well*. Somewhat misleading, I have to say.
Ah! But James Carville does the same thing! It's true, you're right, and as we said Joe Klein owes Atrios a million beers, but see that's why I don't listen to James Carville or Joe Klein, and haven't for several years now. They're both in their own way egotistical shills. Klein and Carville I mean. Armstrong and Moulitsas? Well, the jury is still out.
