It has already been reported here, here, here, here and here, but I have a few final comments.
It's a good sign for the Cox campaign that this was quickly nipped in the bud. This type of "scandal" is the perfect blog fodder. A quick reaction to squelch this type of misstep speaks to a well organized campaign machine.
The sad fact is that I believe this latest Wikismear is only the tip of the iceberg. As one of my commentors pointed out, Wikipedia has already been forced to shut off all editing from Capitol Hill domains. Now, it is apparent this hideous tactic is filtering down to the state level.
It should be stopped. If political operatives manage to ruin the reputation of an internet resource the stature of Wikipedia, how does anyone deny what most of the public already believes? That politics is poison.
Thursday, April 27, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Then why did it just appear now instead of two years ago when it happened?
And if you think that's shocking just wait until I start posting naked pictures.
I've sold my soul to the blogging devil!
How is an unsubstantiated and denied rumor about a person's sexuality appropriately included as a fact in their entry? I get that the existence of the rumors is a fact, but it sure seems like an easy way to give legitimacy to any negative whisper campaign...basically I just start telling people Jeb Bush is into teenage hookers, he'll deny it, then I can post to the Wikipedia entry that "Despite rumors of a predeliction for teenage hookers, Jeb Bush has denied ever consorting with prostitutes."
It looks a little "when did you stop beating your wife" for my tastes. (To use a favorite phrase of Mr. Drift here.)
Post a Comment