Blog Battles
I've been reluctant to post on this, because not being a political professional, I'm not sure how to handle it without getting into the "line of fire" so to speak.
But let's review.
Kos, a centerpiece of the Democratic netroots, said something stupid, and something with which I strongly disagree. He is offering explanations rather than the apology that seems to be called for. (Of course, his life has involved a lot more than mine has, so who knows what kind of legitimate emotional issues that leaves involving different types of military personnel.)
As a result, many on the right are waging a campaign to get campaigns to pull their ads from Daily Kos and stop accepting donations from his readers.
From his readers, you say? Yes, from his readers. And the reason for that, I suspect, is very simple. They fear the Democrats' Internet fund-raising. They know Daily Kos is more than a personal site. They know it is the de facto center of on-line Democratic party activism. And it is that aspect which they are attacking.
Another thing. John Kerry's campaign has delinked Kos. Now this is all coming, not over a full-fledged post, but over a comment made in the heat of an on-line comment discussion. We've seen this before, in the continual harvesting of Blog for America comments by some on the right to attack the Dean campaign. The Daily Kos situation is a little different, in that Kos is actually the host of the site in question. But I still think this is a point we need to examine. What is the nature of on-line discussion? What "ground rules" should we establish for how we interpret and use comments?
Until we figure this out, we might as well side with Abu Aardvark.
UPDATE: See also Atrios. I don't agree with his actions, but the issues he talks about are the same ones I'm drawing from all this.
But let's review.
Kos, a centerpiece of the Democratic netroots, said something stupid, and something with which I strongly disagree. He is offering explanations rather than the apology that seems to be called for. (Of course, his life has involved a lot more than mine has, so who knows what kind of legitimate emotional issues that leaves involving different types of military personnel.)
As a result, many on the right are waging a campaign to get campaigns to pull their ads from Daily Kos and stop accepting donations from his readers.
From his readers, you say? Yes, from his readers. And the reason for that, I suspect, is very simple. They fear the Democrats' Internet fund-raising. They know Daily Kos is more than a personal site. They know it is the de facto center of on-line Democratic party activism. And it is that aspect which they are attacking.
Another thing. John Kerry's campaign has delinked Kos. Now this is all coming, not over a full-fledged post, but over a comment made in the heat of an on-line comment discussion. We've seen this before, in the continual harvesting of Blog for America comments by some on the right to attack the Dean campaign. The Daily Kos situation is a little different, in that Kos is actually the host of the site in question. But I still think this is a point we need to examine. What is the nature of on-line discussion? What "ground rules" should we establish for how we interpret and use comments?
Until we figure this out, we might as well side with Abu Aardvark.
UPDATE: See also Atrios. I don't agree with his actions, but the issues he talks about are the same ones I'm drawing from all this.
Comments