Annapolis Capital Punishment

This is what Editor Tom Marquardt wrote in The Capital on April 1:

“QUOTING FROM BLOGS - The emergence of blogs - running commentaries that virtually anyone can post on the Web - have posed ethical challenges for traditional media.
Not everything you read on the Internet is accurate, or even within several miles of accuracy. This particularly applies to blogs, freewheeling online discussions in which anything can be said and anything can be challenged. Most blogs have no editors, no fact-checkers, no ethical parameters. So should a reporter quote from a discussion on a Web site?
Certainly, the e-mail and electronic discussions about the hiring practices in Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.'s administration were well exposed in the media. Now comes an Internet discussion alleging lewd behavior by midshipmen on spring break, supposedly witnessed by several passengers who joined them on a cruise. Area newspapers quoted generously from the Web site.
I have problems with this. The information is not attributed to anyone - only e-mail addresses are available. Editors ordinarily wouldn't accept anything short of a full name for use in stories. They frown on using anonymous sources. So why should the standards change for quotes lifted from the Internet? How do we know these people were really on the same ship?
Editors here have concluded that quotes from the Internet should be avoided.”

All internet quotes to be avoided??? All right Tom-aside from this hyper generalization and this blanket condemnation of all blogs and internet news, but we both know that anyone can start a blog and be as irresponsible, unaccountable, inaccurate and unethical as they wish, but what’s the difference between those bloggers and Eric Smith and Joe Gross? The main difference is they get paid and get an office and a guaranteed audience!

Here is what Editor Marquardt wrote back to CP after admitting he over generalized, “But I was specifically referring to the Sun and Post quoting from anonymous blogs about mids behaving normally aboard cruise ships. What do you think of that?...you are responsible - thank you - although occasionally wrong (your prognosis of what we were writing about public housing). My point is that newspapers have developed standards over time. We may not always follow them, but there are formal and informal standards of conduct. The wild frontier of the Internet has no standards - agree? So, protocol and ethics are personally driven. That you come from a journalism background gives you a foundation that I'm betting plays into your writing and decision-making. I don't think most non-newspaper blogs have any standards.”

This is CP’s take on the issue. CP still believes that the so-called mainstream media, meaning The Capital as well, are essentially money-making ventures run by managers for profit with the ability to hide behind the First Amendment anytime something uncomfortable comes along. The media are decidedly centrist, elitist, corporate and reflective of the upper echelons of our society who own, operate and write for them--for a profit. Aside from that, our mainstream media have been wracked by a host of serious ethical and yes, even plagiarizing and fictionalizing violations that seem to get worse every year. So, there is plenty of blame to go around and pointing the finger at bloggers, some of whom have done a great service to journalism and democracy by covering and writing about issues not otherwise covered is unfair. CP does agree with the need to quote sources and is upset by the widespread anonymity of many bloggers who are unaccountable and irresponsible, but let’s not condemn all bloggers! Tom, this deserves a clarification in your next editorial.