Karl and the ‘Busters are indignant, sufficiently so that I’m guessing this will be of some interest to our readers, but I honestly couldn’t care less. I don’t mind being reminded that I’m not part of the news media; I happily concede the point, if by “news media” he means reporters. (If he means we’re not part of the media at all, how’d the Obama/Auschwitz thing end up on MSNBC’s plate?) What he misunderstands is that blogger antagonism towards the press, at least among the blogs I read, has always been less about “elevating” blogs to parity with journalists than denying that most journalists operate on some elevated plain to begin with. That’s why the sharpest criticism is usually reserved for especially egregious examples of hauteur, in which some tool congratulates himself for his influence (e.g., “the deciders”) or speaks in purple prose about the secular priesthood of which he’s a member. No blogger I know would claim that he could do John Burns’s job, but oddly enough, it’s rare that you’ll find anyone of Burns’s stature worrying about bloggers. It’s usually guys like this, convinced that he’s operating at some intellectual depth that would crush the average lowly nitwit chained to the computer in his mother’s basement. Follow the link to Karl’s post and revisit some of his career lowlights to see just how deep that depth is.
Note Capehart’s comment near the very end, too, about the poor press being whipped into an unthinking furor. By nitwits.