[dread78645]

Suddenly, the story line shifted from the question Democrats had been trying to ask — whether Bush received special treatment in the Guard — to whether a network long detested by conservatives had been duped in its quest to air a report critical of the president in the midst of the reelection campaign.

Actually, the question is whether Gunga Dan & friends deliberately tried to smear the president by passing out known fraudulent documents.

"It was amazing Thursday to watch the documents story go from FreeRepublic.com, a bastion of right-wing lunacy,

Right-wing lunatics. That would be us.

"The mainstream press is having to follow them," said Jeffrey Seglin, a professor at Emerson College in Boston. "The fear I have is: How do you know who's doing the Web logs?

How do we know who's teaching at Emerson College or writing political commentary at the Times?

[sweetliberty]

"The fear I have is: How do you know who's doing the Web logs?"

What difference does it make? Why can't these idiots weigh the material on its own merits?

[goldstategop]

Its "open source" journalism. Most blog bios are posted, all sources, methods and viewpoints are openly exchanged and subject to peer review. The Old Media's proprietary fact-checking process is full of holes. They hate having to admit a bunch of amateurs ran rings around them.