Some thoughts on SprezzaturaGate, from Slate and Josh Marshall (here and here). Several months ago, after Michael Hiltzik was "reassigned" by the local paper after he was caught sockpuppetting, I posted my displeasure, only to be condemned in no uncertain terms by an anally retentive blowhard on the paper's staff. He didn't have a good explanation as to what Hiltzik did wrong, either; what it comes down to is that posting under a pseudonym (whether it be on your blog or elsewhere), and using it to attack third parties while extolling your courage and wit, is embarassing to the company, not unethical per se. The comments section of a blog is supposed to be for public debate, and even the most self-glorifying sockpuppetry can add to the debate, if only to encourage the readership to respond in kind.
Nevertheless, the LA Times and the New Republic have the right to "reassign" people for the crime of "lame-assery," as Josh Marshall puts it. When you accept a paycheck from someone to write a blog, you can't be surprised when they set limits that would be unacceptable to the rest of us.
No comments:
Post a Comment