Kurtz writes:
Most Democratic lawmakers, meanwhile, lay low. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid sidestepped a question yesterday about whether the Times should be prosecuted. Similarly, while the conservative blogosphere was on fire over the Times, many liberal Web sites ignored the controversy.
Wrong.
A quick walk through the liberal blogosphere shows several posts addressing this issue as memeorandum and Technorati clearly indicate.
Kurtz offers no support for his assertion. One is left wondering what he relied on to make such a judgment.
Update: Here's a copy of the e-mail I sent to Kurtz and the Washington Post's ombudsman:
Mr Kurtz,
You wrote this in your column on Wednesday:
"Similarly, while the conservative blogosphere was on fire over the Times, many liberal Web sites ignored the controversy."
How can you possibly think that liberal blogs would ignore this story considering the huge implications it has on the future of the freedom of the press?
Your conclusion is just plain wrong. If you searched memeorandum or Technorati, you'd know that. In fact, Washington Post's site lists bloggers who are covering its stories. Did you even check those listings before you came up with this false assertion?
It seems to me that if you are going to make such a claim, you ought to have the data to back it.
Signed,
Update: I received an automated e-mail from Deborah Howell's office (the Washington Post's ombudsman) to inform me that she is on vacation until July 5. I'll have to wait until after that date to see if she has a response to my inquiry. In the meantime, Kurtz made no mention of his faux pas in his column today, 'Bloggers on the Payroll', although he actually pulls quotes from liberal blogs about the NYT controversy. Was that his way of saying mea culpa?
No comments:
Post a Comment