Doug over at Dougpetch.com has an intersting take on Howard Kurtz, Eason Jordan and Jeff Gannon:
The reason I find this interesting is that - unlike the Jordan piece, which featured quotes from Jordan defending his remarks while ignoring a large piece of the controversy being reported by the many blogs following the story (his previous statements, etc.) - this latest article features nothing from Gannon beyond the statement posted on his website and features many of the lurid side issues raised by the the blogs who've been hot on Gannon's trail. Of course, I accept that Gannon may not want to grant interviews, but nothing in Kurtz's article indicates that he even attempted to obtain one. Now, I'm not a professional journalist, but shouldn't both asking for the interview and noting that the request was refused or ignored be an integral part of this story? If I were a professional journalist, and considering the amount of rumor and inuendo surrounding Gannon due to the domain names that are being linked to him, I would hope that I would conduct a bit more in-depth research - and note the results of that research in my article.
Anyone else have the sense that Jordan gets the benefit of the doubt from Kurtz because they know each other, while, to Kurtz, Gannon is an anonymous slug who deserves to have salt poured all over him? Or is it just me?
No comments:
Post a Comment