Hiltzik's Journalistic "Standards"
The inimitable Patterico points out that regrettable L.A. Times blogger Michael Hiltzik appears to be adopting pseudonyms to defend himself and attack others -- while being less than honest about his practice.
As Patterico notes, "This just isn’t the way that bloggers do things."
Is anyone surprised? Heretofore, it's seemed that Hiltzik's one M.O. is to lob nasty personal attacks at other bloggers with whom he disagrees, in hopes of eliciting a response which will, in turn, boost his traffic. (My personal favorite was when he called me "vacuous." To the extent that the term is most often applied to pretty blonde cheerleaders, I accepted the compliment with no small degree of amusement.)
But apparently Hiltzik stoops to other devices, as well.
As Patterico notes, "This just isn’t the way that bloggers do things."
Is anyone surprised? Heretofore, it's seemed that Hiltzik's one M.O. is to lob nasty personal attacks at other bloggers with whom he disagrees, in hopes of eliciting a response which will, in turn, boost his traffic. (My personal favorite was when he called me "vacuous." To the extent that the term is most often applied to pretty blonde cheerleaders, I accepted the compliment with no small degree of amusement.)
But apparently Hiltzik stoops to other devices, as well.
posted by LadybugUSA at 8:51 AM
2 Comments:
Mr. Hiltzik dug his hole deeper with his response. There are a dozen better ways to have handled the expose than his lame "What's wrong with blogging anonymously?" (my phrasing, not his) ranging from, "So, what of it?" to "I'm sorry and I've stopped doing it".
As far as I am concerned the L.A.Times yanking Hiltzik's blog is the right move. He has no credibility hiding behind fake names.
In fact, I think NONE of us, if we wish to be taken seriously as a commentator, should hide behind kitschy screen names on our blogs.
I talk about this incident on my blog...
Publius' Forum
Warner Todd Huston
Post a Comment
<< Home