Were people defending Gannon or Bush? I saw a lot of what appeared to be DU trolls making claims like Gannon was "given access to the highest levels of power" and other absurd things and trying to somehow tie Gannon to the White House. I also saw what appeared to be DU trolls posing as conservatives attempting to smear all Republicans/conservatives with Gannon's apparent lack of morals.
I didn't see anyone defending Gannon, though it's possible it happened.
I'm sure there was some sort of protest in support of Gannon by some freepers but that seemed to die off pretty quick.
I don't know about people defending Gannon....but there were some that were correct to defend his reporting (which can still be seen on mensnewsdaily.com)
His filed reports about d.c. stuff, when cross referenced with other reporters, seems to be accurate. Which is more than can be said about MSNBC.
I think most are upset with the lack of disclosure by Howard Kurtz....about some of his sources on the Gannon story.
If a reporter is gonna claim a site as a source...and the site was on the Howard Dean payroll...and looking at raising funds for the DNC.....well, responsible reporters should disclose that.
Then there seems to be some stuff reported by Olbermann and folks like Dana Milbanks....that look to be false.
Look, I don't know about the Gannon guy's life....and I could care less.
WHAT SHOULD BE LOOKED AT....WAS HIS REPORTING ACCURATE?
Some say he just gave transcripts of what went on in pressers...well, IF A REPORTER IS REPORTING ON THE WHAT THE WHITE HOUSE SAYS....THEN OTHER STUFF SHOULD NOT BE ADDED.
Yeah, it makes for dry reporting...but many want that dry reporting .....since it usually shows some accuracy.