Ms. Zerbisias,
In your interesting article about the Pajamhedin, I believe you display an error in thought which renders the entire article nugatory.
The error, if I am right, is that you understand us (I count myself among the pajamahedin, though I should more precisely be called bathrobehedin -- I don't wear pajamas) to be attacking the sources of our information. But the problem as I see it is that in the MSM (Mainstream Media) too many reporters not only bring information to public attention but also (As Mr. Jennings in a recent advertisement claimed to do) they try to tell us what it means.
AS you and I both know, editing begins when one decides THIS story, rather than THAT one, is worthy of reporting. That editing is unavoidable. But while the MSM pretend to report, they actually end up seeking to indoctrinate.
When the MSM goes back to reporting, the pajamahedin will happily return to our enjoyably bilious commentary. But when they insult our intelligence and mislead our country's electorate by slanting their reporting, we will do what we morally and legally can to give them as much trouble as they can stomach -- and more.
In related news .... ;) I think you may not understand or appreciate the pleasure we take when our typos and misspellings are pointed out. To us this indicates that we amateurs who do not have the support of proof-readers, fact-checkers, and style books do a better job of getting the news out than you professionals.
For example, you write
Which brings us to those pajamahadeen, the online brigades who claim credit for bringing those documents into question and forcing Rather to apologize for his reporting. [emphasis added]Not only do some of us (not me) CLAIM credit for bringing the Rather-gate forgeries into question, we DESERVE credit. It was unpaid amateurs or volunteers who in a few minutes did what Gungha Dan neglected or refused to do, namely look critically at the documents he adduced as evidence.
By your use of "claim credit" you suggest that the claim is, at least, questionable. No one who knows what happened could suggest that. So we are left with an uncomfortable question: Are you dishonest, merely ignorant, or some third thing?
What ever the answer to that question is, in your attempt to mock and to disparage us, you show why we are necessary and why we will not go away. Somebody has got to care about the truth. If the professionals won't, then we amateurs will set up a howling that will continue to be heard even as far away as the editorial offices of the Toronto Star. We will not only howl. We will hunt, we will pursue, and we will catch your brethren (and sistren) in their dishonesty and we will take their jobs.
One down, uncounted thousands to go.
ROFLMAO!!!
Well said.
This paragraph gives me an idea, a way for JimRob to collect more revenue:
"I think you may not understand or appreciate the pleasure we take when our typos and misspellings are pointed out. To us this indicates that we amateurs who do not have the support of proof-readers, fact-checkers, and style books do a better job of getting the news out than you professionals."
The idea is that JimRob could set up a subscription service where someone checks the grammar, spelling and basic sense of posts and sends them back to the poster with recommended changes prior to posting, just like the editorial services of a major newspaper. Anyone who posts with obvious misspellings and poor grammar could be pinged in a friendly manner, suggesting that they subscribe to this service for their next posting. This could be "hugh".