We've been hearing from a few people who are unhappy with our casual dismissal of the "blogola" scandal at Daily Kos and MyDD. They fume that the "WSJ did a slop job on this story--Dailykos had a disclainmer on his ad that he was doing consulting work for Dean's group--the other blog went down during the race. . . do I detect a little 'blog envy' here?" We also elicit pity: It's a shame that you have decided to slander two people without even asking for their side of the story."
Whoa, there. In case we haven't been clear: Yes, we have "blog envy." We experience it every time someone waves a pair of James jeans in front of us that we can't afford because Nick Denton pays us in rubles. And the "Other side of the story"? Hello? That would make us journalists, and thus unable to accept money in return for supporting specific ideological positions. Such moral slipperiness is what makes being a blogger so fun -- that, and cold, hard cash. Or warm, hard something. Whatever. We like it. Does anyone really expect bloggers to be on the level? How could we keep ourselves in cats and pajamas if we didn't sell our invective on the side?
In the interest of full disclosure, we admit that Dan Rather paid us to say that.
Bloggers on Dean Take [Wonkette]
The Narrative, A Proposal, and an Apology [Zonkette]