Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Impressively dumb. Congratulations.

We still have time to mess this up!

Too often we confuse noise with substance. too often we confuse setbacks with defeat.

No one could have predicted…

A thin legal pretext to veneer over their personal religious and political desires

Good lord, these people are nuts.

If you’re pissed about Biden’s speech, he was talking about you.

JFC, are there no editors left at that goddamn rag?

The cruelty is the point; the law be damned.

A snarling mass of vitriolic jackals

Thanks to your bullshit, we are now under siege.

An almost top 10,000 blog!

Infrastructure week. at last.

Balloon Juice has never been a refuge for the linguistically delicate.

Nothing worth doing is easy.

You cannot shame the shameless.

The poor and middle-class pay taxes, the rich pay accountants, the wealthy pay politicians.

We are builders in a constant struggle with destroyers. let’s win this.

Pessimism assures that nothing of any importance will change.

Usually wrong but never in doubt

You can’t attract Republican voters. You can only out organize them.

Historically it was a little unusual for the president to be an incoherent babbling moron.

Battle won, war still ongoing.

Whoever he was, that guy was nuts.

You are here: Home / This Is A Scandal?

This Is A Scandal?

by | 10 Comments

This post is in: 

This piece in the Opinion Journal is the dumbest non-scandal ‘scandal’ I have EVER heard about:

In an article on Howard Dean’s fund-raising, The Hill, a newspaper that covers Congress, offers the interesting revelation that as part of his effort “to maximize his online fundraising punch,” Dean has been “paying ‘bloggers’ or professional Internet surfers to keep the enthusiasm up on his website.”

We’re all for free enterprise, but this does point up an advantage of “old media” over bloggers. Professional journalists may have their biases, but those of us who work for big-media outfits are bound by codes of ethics under which taking money in exchange for favorable coverage would be a huge no-no. Many bloggers, of course, genuinely are independent commentators, but there’s no easy way of knowing which ones are on the take.

Hunh? Here is the article BotW refers to:

Dean has done other things to maximize his online fundraising punch, like reinvesting money into expanding donor lists and paying

Reader Interactions

10Comments

  1. 1.

    Moe Lane

    Thought so. First rule of thumb for the Internet: if it sounds too good to be true, it is.

  2. 2.

    Ricky

    I think Taranto (and several others, maybe) misread that. On their behalf, it could’ve been written better, but it appears he read it with a jaundiced eye.

  4. 4.

    Jim

    Not to defend BOTW, but the article says that Dean has been “paying ‘bloggers’ or professional Internet surfers to keep the enthusiasm up on his website.” Like you, I read that statement to mean that he’s paying his own bloggers to provide content on the website. But it isn’t crazy to read it as saying that he’s paying other outside bloggers to blog about his blog.

    In other words – while dumb, BOTW is certainly not guilty of the dumbest statement of the week.

  6. 6.

    M. Scott Eiland

    To recycle an old cliche, I’d slam Dean for spitting on the sidewalk if the opportunity arose, but this is an asinine thing to get on his case about.

  7. 7.

    Ricky

    The WSJ published an update & admitted that they misread.

    YOU CHARGED THEM WITH LYING, Oliver. To say that you owe them an apology is an understatement.

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. I TOLD YOU!

    I told you people’s reading comprehension sucks!! Dean has done other things to maximize his online fundraising punch, like reinvesting money into expanding donor lists and paying