10-23-2012, 10:06 AM
quote:It's actually deeper than the one commentary and the 38 reader comments. Tiffany began using terms like "debacle" and "disaster" in what were supposedly news stories as soon as she decided that she wasn't being shown the respect she thought she should be given. IIRC, it started when she was scooped by a Honolulu news outlet and then not given full access after she had already condemned the whole process. To make things worse, there was a tendency on her part early on to not clearly differentiate between what were supposed to be news items and what were supposed to be commentaries. This improved later, but the content of the two genres became virtually indisguishable after a while.
Originally posted by hikatz
It's simpler to go to her blog, in the search box enter election mess. Read through the "Commentary" and the 38 comments. Heaven forbid you disagree or express criticism at her writing, you will be banned from her website.
Reminds me of Fox News fair and balanced! Sorry Ken, I know you are a loyal supporter, but the whole thing is childish!
Very early on, Tiffany's coverage of what was, to be fair, a messy election ceased to be journalism and became a vendetta which was encouraged by a group of readers screaming for blood. People who disagreed were either hounded by the peanut gallery or banned. This is the danger of operating a blog where there is no editor. In a newspaper or magazine, there would be someone riding shotgun on this process, keeping it honest, so to speak. With blogs, it's usually a one person operation and the lines are easy to blur.
I stopped participating in the discussion on Tiffany's blog some time ago. The problem I had was with the tone of it all and the fact that any sort of name calling and abuse was OK as long as it supported her increasingly biased point of view. The fact that she had lost what I felt to be any semblance of objective journalistic standards didn't help.