I'm still rather amazed by the number of people that actually read the previous blog entry regarding Mary Beth McDade. In all fairness, many of you pointed out a few of my copy editing errors, which have been corrected. (I do, seriously, need a copy editor. I strive for clean copy, but, frankly, it's never been my strongest suit. Ask any of my editors.)
I suspect Ms. McDade is less than pleased by the attention. This, of course, assumes she has heard about it. Based on the attention and hits this has received (notes in LA Observed and the Daily News blog), it seems fairly likely. Journalism is a small world, no doubt.
Do I feel bad about this? A bit. Blogging about life in Burbank does not ethically require me to announce my intentions. A writer for a newspaper (or television station) must tell his or her source that he or she is speaking to a reporter. That is, they must be given notice they may be quoted.
Mary Beth got no such warning from me. Mind you, it probably wouldn't have mattered. I wasn't trying to interview her, nor get in the way of her reportage (as the blog in the Daily News has suggested). I simply noted her reactions, got suitably annoyed, and published my thoughts through the magic of Al Gore's internet and the good people at Blogger.
I suspect, though, that as blogging becomes increasingly trusted as a source of news, the rules of old-school journalism will come into play. Snarky, gotcha journalism will certainly have a place, but it's probably not fair to call it news.
1 comment:
Blogging isn't traditional journalism and your post doesn't pretend to be. I suspect you might feel a bit bad because of the personal embarrassment it might cause Ms. McDade. And I'm sure that wasn't your intention.
But yours wasn't a personal criticism, it was a professional one. And suggesting that a local reporter in the largest, possibly most diverse, media market in the U.S. should know about Pol Pot isn't an outlandish act.
Post a Comment