Wednesday, December 09, 2009

Into The Ethical Woods - The Challenge

Last night, a voice from on high, issued a challenge and placed an unexpected burden on me. It boiled down to "do better".

A moment of anger passed into the realization the voice (combined with the advice of another more personal voice) was right. It is not enough to admit your standards slipped - action is required.

You don't need me to provide you the latest update on the hijinks at the Gold Dome Delta Chi House. There are plenty of places to rock your jollies on the latest rumor and innuendo.

Instead, unless there is a breaking news where I am compelled to respond, I'll leave that mess to others. Instead, I'll focus my writing on the ethical issues new (and old) media face in this turbulent period.

First up will be the "temptation of easy traffic". Look for it soon.

9 comments:

Sid Cottingham said...

Here is the problem as I see it, and I write this after suggesting to you that I knew where you were coming from and how you felt, but it was not -- and I do not believe is not -- a baseless post. But the reality of the matter is, that after all these months of time, to date no one has produced the smoking gun. There is word that the gun may be worst than smoking, it may even be showing, be again, it has not been produced. To follow traditional media, you wait, even if the wait costs one a breaking story. But I say again, quit whipping yourself. You do not run a rumor mill, and know one thinks you do.

Johnathan said...

I agree with Sid wholeheartedly. You had numerous sources telling you this, as well as other outlets - traditional an non-traditional - suggesting the story was breaking (and, who knows, it still may).

But you're not a rumor-mongering or a gossip-hound. You followed the appropriate procedure, had multiple - albeit anonymous - sources and a fellow outlet that was running with a much more poorly sourced piece.

MelGX said...

WTF is going on over here? It's just blogging, not brain surgery. I never took you for a navel gazer Grift.

griftdrift said...

Not navel gazing, Mel. It's not like I haven't written about ethics in blogging before. It would be rather disingenuous of me to not write about it now. And it won't be just about me. I think this entire affair is an opportunity to have another discussion about the direction all media is taken.

And it's not brain surgery. But it is my writing and I do take that seriously.

MelGX said...

Yes, but it seems like all of the calories and none of the fun. When someone pays me to write for a publication that bills itself as a news service, then I'll be happy to have the "ethics" discussion. Until then, not so much.

JMP said...

You know, I've got no idea of what's going down here. But I do know that the PP has come up with a rather interesting story, buried deep in their comments (HouseKeeping...) that's awfully well, curious to say the least. Wrong sort of Burke too. 'Nuff said. But this was only in the last day or so. So who knows. But evidently more shoes to drop so to speak. But it'll likely all come out anyway. It usually does. Ask JRE.

JMP

Sara said...

JMP, that story has been cleansed from the PP thread this morning. Apparently Erick only feels like spreading some of the rumors floating around the capitol, but not all (and certainly not ones where the lobbyist in question is named.)

JMP said...

That's fine Sara, I found it so deliciously amusing that I copied it. And hey, you can't keep that sort of stuff covered up forever. JMP

JMP said...

Me? After living through a decade where the press, here in Ga. & elsewhere went with any damnable rumor possible about Clinton and his supposed GFs, I'd dearly like the 'press & media' to actually start reporting on same for the Ga. GOP. There's plenty there to dig into, and most of it evidently very real 'stuff indeed. And I'll again remind folks that after about $100 million expended, and an decade long investigation involving more than twice as many FBI agents than were following Osama Bin Laden at the time, the Starr report/investigation found 1, yes only (1) of these GF allegations credible enough to work on and pass onto Congress. And of course there were no ‘secret’ children involved either. But top to bottom? They were all satisfied enough to call for Clinton's impeachment & immediate removal from office as ‘unfit’. Why is it always a double standard when it comes to judging & reporting on the Repug's? They're just meaner & will very likely retaliate immediately against anyone who dares question their yes, corrupt rules & rule?

JMP