Pajamas Media

49 Comments

The Hobbesian Father:

I agree with you on that. Jetblue is free to advertise on whatever website the board of directors deems appropriate. I am likewise free to take my business to whichever airline I deem appropriate. If the airline advertising choices make my choice easier, so be it.

But I am curious about one thing. You say:

“Advertising on Jihadist or Nazi sites or the like should not be countenanced.”

I’m not sure what you mean by “should not be countenanced.” Are you saying the advertiser should be punished legally? Economically? I’ll assume the latter.

You accept the idea that a line exists between who it is acceptable to advertise with and who it is unacceptable to advertise with. But where is the line? There’s a large divide between Kos and Jihadists. The line falls somewhere in between. What should be considered venditare non grata?*

I’m not trying to pick a fight, I’m just curious. Am I a petty fool for refusing to fly JetBlue because of Kos, but a principled objector if I refuse to fly an airline that advertises on the KKK website? It’s not like I equate the two, but I can object to two things without believing them to be equivalent.

I don’t eat foods with Splenda or MSG in them. MSG makes me violently ill, Splenda merely makes my mouth feel like I’ve been chewing on a sweatsock from the 1990’s. I dislike them both but not for the same reason, or to the same intensity, but I don’t consume either. So it is with the Jihadist/Moonbat comparison– I hate the former, merely distrust the latter, but I suffer neither gladly.

*(please excuse my latin– I used an online translator and it might be wrong)

Jul 17, 2007 - 12:53 pm RFTR:

I agree 100 percent. It is entirely within JetBlue’s rights to sponsor YearlyKos. It is also entirely within my rights as a consumer to stop flying JetBlue as a result.

I wonder: a)if in their market testing they calculated how many customers like me they’d lose, and b)If Mr. Simon would lump me in with O’Reilly or not.

Jul 17, 2007 - 12:57 pm Harkonnendog:

It is like you didn’t watch that piece at all. O’Reilly made an argument that the Kos site is a hate site, citing examples of writing from the site to make his case. If you are going to refute that case why not refute the case he made, using specific examples?

Jul 17, 2007 - 1:03 pm Cro:

When does an organization or site cross the line from vigorous espousal of political ideals to the jihadist/nazi side of the spectrum?

I have to tell you, you must think that line is a lot further than I do because of the constant calls for death to Cheney, Kill Chimpy McBush Hitler etc that can be read on Kos.

As you wrote, you tend to ignore the site…I would too if they weren’t constantly calling for the death of Conservatives and the level of vulgarity in which they indulge. Maybe you should read a little of the “quality” material over there before taking a position.

Jul 17, 2007 - 1:07 pm Russ:

You’ve missed the point. Bill O’Reilly is not restricting what Kos says - he is exercising his OWN freedom of speech by questioning whether a coorporation wants to be associated with such extreme views.

Another alternate motive may be that O’Reilly knows this will generate publicity for what the kooks on Kos say. While Kos may be relatively well known amongst the left base and others in the blogosphere, the average American has no idea who he is or what goes on on the website. But a great number of left-leaning politicians have pandered hard to Kos and his ilk.

By making such a stink, O’Reilly shows what Kos really is to more people, who then may not really care for the politicians groveling so much to him and his ilk.

Remember what such publicity for Michael Moore sitting in the democrat VIP box in 2004 did for the left? It didn’t persuade conservatives or liberals one way or the other, but it did turn off a number of swing voters who helped decide the election.

Jul 17, 2007 - 1:08 pm Paul from Florida:

Just a quick anti ‘Progressive’ dig. I thought corporations were evil? 40 years of evil corporations down the drain. Drat! I suppose when you’re 60 or more, have a couple of convertible SAABS, a vacation house and a evil Bush economy 501k fat pension, corporations are now different than they were in 1966. Social Conscious and all.

But, JetBlue? Don’t airlines burn up one out of every ten gallons of fuel What’s next, strip mine coal sponsorship for KOS? Also, did anyone mention animal hide seats on JetBlue?

Lastly, smart move for JetBlue. Us cheap, make’m eat ketchup conservatives couldn’t care less so long as they give good value, and in this way JetBlue has co-opted the lefties. (Not that lefties would sell out.)

Jul 17, 2007 - 1:10 pm mikem:

“But we should not restrict their speech in any way - or their sponsorship.”

Grrr. Just whose speech or sponsorship is being restricted? Who issued the order? Didn’t you just attempt to “restrict” the speech of critics of the sponsorship. Didn’t we spend the last several years arguing that criticism is not censorship? It would be less ironic if you stated that you feel that businesses should not be criticized for the politics or views of those they fund, but that criticism has been a quite common tactic for decades. All parties have used it, but most effectively by liberals and libertarians.

As for Jet Blue, there is a healthy segment of the U.S. population that despises most of the views expressed at DailyKos. Why should they be kept uninformed as to Jet Blue’s funding of their convention?

Jul 17, 2007 - 1:14 pm Mike C.:

“But we should not attempt to restrict their speech in any way - or their sponsorship.”

But what if the only way to avoid this is to restrict one’s own speech.

JetBlue should absolutely have the right to sponsor any organization it wants. At the same time, those, like O’Reilly, who disagree absolutely have the right to criticize their choice to do so.

Freedom of expression works both ways. JetBlue should not be immune from criticism, even from a demagogue like O’Reilly, because they took a stance. Their sponsorship and his criticism are two sides of the same freedom of expression coin.

Jul 17, 2007 - 1:22 pm SteveBrooklineMA:

O’Reilly was over the top here, and cornering the CEO of JetBlue on the street and shoving a camera in his face was obnoxious. I find Kos too juvenile to read. But Kos is no more a hate site than, say, LGF is; both frequently have offensive content left in their comments sections. O’Reilly was comparing Kos to a “Nazi” site. Most ridiculous.

Jul 17, 2007 - 1:26 pm Michael Smock:

I doubt the new executive team at JetBlue made the call to sponsor The Daily Kos convention. I’ll guess that somebody on the marketing team advocating their personal political agenda made the choice and decision. And the CEO now finds himself playing defense. Quite poorly I might add.

The only way this move makes sense is if Jet Blue wants to become the airline of choice for progressives/liberals and is intentionally alienating most of its potential customer base.

Jul 17, 2007 - 1:26 pm Paul:

Simon - Your right - they can sponsor anyone they want. And I, (until the FAA says I can’t) may chooseto fly ANY AIRLINE I WISH TO FLY and to also be a loyal supporter (”TrueBlue” member since ‘03) - so as MY rights go, they include the right to take my business elsewhere…Please tell Mr. David Barger that I am absolutely furious that JetBlue has the gall to sponsor the likes of the web site “DailyKos” and their ilk is not only stupid, it’s against their corporate “positioning”.

I thought (as a frequent Florida/JFK passenger) that JetBlue was an APOLITICAL, kind, tongue-in-cheek, irreverent, fun, and lets-not-take-ourselves-too seriously airline (UNLIKE THEIR COMPETITORS). Now they have not only chosen to sponsor a very political website…but one that is FAR LEFT and almost so hateful, and vile to any intlligent internet user that I can’t imagine ANYONE sponsoring their gutter sewage diatribes.

So now I am seriously re-thinking being a JetBlue frequent “True Blue” flyer. At least “US Scaire” isn’t stupid enough to sponsor such a bunch of Far Left Wing of sanctimonious sewer rats. Bye-by and thank you for NOT flying JetBlue….

Jul 17, 2007 - 1:35 pm BumperStickerist:

The fact that JetBlue is non-union didn’t seem to affect YKos’s acceptance of JetBlue’s sponsorship offer.

Jul 17, 2007 - 1:43 pm Dave:

It is no wonder that Jet Blue has taken this path. If you look into the genesis of the airline you wlll find that it got its start with ultra cheap leases on its aircraft from Airbus, a consortium of Socialist Europe. Under that agreement the airline did not have to make payments or at least made minimum payments for several years. Boeing would not give them the same deal. When the airline began to service its debt and the fuel costs escalated, then it hemoraged red. That it would sponsor a progressive web site’s convention is a natural. Socialists are fellow travelers even if they are in the executive suite.

Jul 17, 2007 - 1:55 pm photoncourier.blogspot.com:

Roger…”JetBlue’s leadership has determined that associating themselves with the Kos Convention will sell tickets for them. You may differ in that analysis, but I would imagine they have done market research”…companies make all kinds of decisions without doing market research. How would one research this, anyhow?..you would have to analyze the potential negative reactions, as well as the positive ones, and it would be an expensive project with results that might not be all that definitive.

It’s also possible that someone made this decision without understanding what Kos actually *is*…and it’s also possible that someone made the decision because of their own sympathies with this organization.

In the latter case, I think there would be an issue with fiduciary responsibility. Corporate leadership has (properly) pretty wide discretion, but they are required to act in what they honestly believe to be the best interests of the business and its owners. I don’t think they should have an unlimited right to use the corporate treasury to promote their personal political views, and I don’t think they do have such a right, although I haven’t yet heard of any litigation on this matter.

Jul 17, 2007 - 2:10 pm Darren:

No one is “restricting” JetBlue’s speech or sponsorship; rather, some might take a market approach to the problem. If JetBlue is going to use (DailyKos’) politics to try to sell tickets, they have to realize that some people will *not* buy tickets for the same reason.

I’m usually not a big fan of boycotts and the like, but I don’t see anything wrong with *others* participating in them.

Jul 17, 2007 - 2:27 pm Kasper Hauser:

I don’t understand your premise at all. No-one is infringing anyone’s rights.

JetBlue has a right to align itself with the looney Left. I have a right to say to JetBlue “Hey. If you are going to align with the Looney Left, I’m going to find another airline to fly!”

That’s it in a nutshell. Political freedom, freedom of speech and freedom of the marketplace.

Freedom all around! That’s what it’s about baby! (That, and not flying JetBlue.)

Jul 17, 2007 - 2:28 pm Warren Bonesteel:

JetBlue is perfectly free to run their business however they wish.

The rest of us are perfectly free to use another airline if we wish.

That’s America.

Insulting your customers and potential stockholders - or implying agreement with those who do so - never pays off. Never has. Never will.

Jul 17, 2007 - 2:33 pm Michael Markowitz:

Dear Roger,

I agree with your position regarding corporate free speech.

Hopefully those of us who object to JetBlue’s choice will exercise our free speech and fly other airlines.

Jul 17, 2007 - 2:39 pm Jack is Back!:

Jet Blue’s market research probably showed that “young radical progressives” like the Kos Kidz [do you ever read their comments?] are cheap and love to have instant gratification at the lowest possible cost. I wonder if Jet Blue will, instead of awareding frequent flier points, give the Kos crowd carbon offsets for flying with them, gratis.

Jul 17, 2007 - 2:47 pm Roger L. Simon:

Very interesting comments. Thanks.

Of course I agree that everyone is free to reject JetBlue for what they have done, just as they are free to do it as a company.

I have to admit though that Photoncourier’s point (or something like it) occurred to me as well. It is possible that JetBlue did not do “due diligence” and just “winged it” (no pun intended). In that case, Photocourier might well be correct and someone was not following his/her fiduciary responsibility

Jul 17, 2007 - 3:08 pm gcblues:

maybe i have been asleep for 30 years, but it used to be the right defended indiviual liberty, the left wanted collectivization by decree or force. therefore it was not 2 equal but different ism ideas, but that one was evil, one was good.

orwell would be proud. todays left is just as oppossed to freedom as ever, and the right has joined them. the right now wishes to use the state central planners to create a state consonant with their personal and moral values. que bueno.

the right and left, no longer a disnstiction with a difference. both are equal in their immorality.

so who cares who jet blue sponsors. its all about jockeying the law to fit your needs and then screaming “law and order” .

ok, maybe i did not sleep 30 years. maybe i returned to 1939 italy.

Jul 17, 2007 - 3:45 pm eb:

The best thing going for JetBlue in this situation is Bill O’Reilly’s awesome jerkyness. I would never claim that the KosKids were any less jerky but if ever there was somebody I would want railing against me on the airwaves, it would be one of the most obnoxious jerks on TV.

Having said that, as somebody who was a great admirer and user of Jetblue just…oh, yesterday, I’m suddenly rethinking my future with them.

In spite of O’Reilly of course.

Jul 17, 2007 - 4:58 pm RodgerS:

Seems to me that the real difference is where Simon sets the bar vs. Oreilly. Basically O’Reilly sets the bar higher. O’Reilly feels the Kosites engage in and foster “hate” speech.

I agree with O’Reilly Simon that Jihadi and Nazi speech is over the top, but the Kos “hate” speech is also over the top…so O’Reilly wins the argument as far as my personal vote is concerned.

Jul 17, 2007 - 4:58 pm David:

They may have thought it was a good idea as Daily Kos is one of the most visited blogs and thought that helping sponsor the convention would reach a lot of people very cheaply. This of course means they are clueless when it comes to the blogosphere.

Jul 17, 2007 - 5:14 pm Linda Frank:

I couldn’t agree more, eb. O’Reilly is the best publicist JetBlue ever had. Via O’Reilly and others JetB is going to profit usually from their Kos sponsorship. If O’Reilly had ignored, no one would have paid the slightest attention to the whole thing.

Jul 17, 2007 - 9:01 pm Giangho:

I don’t think anyone has disagreed that the corporation has a free speech right to associate with KOS or whomever/whatever site, but why is there a reluctance to call a spade a spade?

I speak as a three tour infantryman in Vietnam and a 30 year veteran. If you align yourself with the enemy you are the enemy. Giving me other ways or means to win is the way to disagree with the strategy , advocating for the enemy’s position is…aligning yourself with the enemy!(read ENEMY), this just means you are the enemy without actually putting on the uniform (pun intended).

Soldiers are trained to eliminate the most immediate threat. Usually someone with a gun (as in Iraq) will be first to die…the one with the knife later, that is, until you feel it at your throat, then that lucky guy just moved to the front of the line! The enemy in the states might not now be as immediately threatening as the guy or gal with the gun in Iraq but they certainly want to put the knife at your neck.

What I see is that leftist sites are in disagreement with U.S. policy and supportive of Al Quaida’s position. Even the assistant village idiot can figure it out. Whose side are they on and what weapon did they bring?

Jul 17, 2007 - 9:31 pm Carol:

I AM a market researcher and my experience has shown that most corporations are extremely confused by blogs and all things digital.

However, there’s a history of corporations supporting political media - Scott Trust/Auto Trader in the UK, Bill and Melinda shoring up declining newspapers in the US, happens all the time.

Now, though, we can read about it as it happens and react and boycott if necessary.

Jul 18, 2007 - 2:42 am Matt, Esq.:

JetBlue can do what it wants. However, Roger, you’re completely missing hte point. If you’re Jet Blue CEO and you made a “business decision” then say you made a “business decision”, which encompassed frank consideration of the bile spewed on that board, and after due consideration, you decided to sponser them anyway.

Playing stupid on national TV is insulting and dishonest. Roger, you should be ashamed for defending these idiots.

Jul 18, 2007 - 5:12 am Dryfuss:

Hopefully all of these comments will be directed into “Jet Blue’s ” public information center, if they are intelligent enough to have one ?
Roger,
You have brought info to the front that might otherwise have gone unnoticed by many. Keep stimulating the thinkers to get on board ” no pun meant ” and show strength in numbers by
vocalizing opinions with intelligent thought. I am sure Mr. O’Reilly will comment on your site
and what was said , thus more watchers of his program will realize what ‘Jet Blues ” action really is about. A foolish move on their part.
I am glad “Blogging” has opened the doors to
public world debate, a much needed forum for
“Policy Makers” to heed, before invoking some
very bad law’s into law, effecting the world at large. Keep making radical subjects open for
discussion, it keeps more of the world citizens on their toes mentally and helps many air their
frustrations with government/corporations/ unions, etc..What a great time in history that we can communicate attitudes with such a wide range of listeners.
The Public Now Has A Voice , Use It.

Jul 18, 2007 - 7:22 am DRew:

So Mr. Simon says he doesn’t know much about the Daily Kos website and then goes on to denigrate it, says its not open to diverse opinion, and that it approaches self-parody. That a website created by a US Army veteran to bring together progressive voices attracts this much attention is testament to its strength. Most progressive websites allow for public commenting and therefore are open to ridiculous postings by anonymous and non-anonymous posters alike. That O’Reilly used this as proof of it being a hate site is something that is beyond parody. Perhaps you should read the site before commenting and for all you who call Kos a loony leftist, you do realize he’s more of a libertarian gun-rights Democrat who supported Jim Webb, and many other moderate Democrats, don’t you?
And if all the readers of Pajamas media actually did boycott Jet Blue, I doubt they would hardly notice and I might have more elbow room as I fly from Provincetown to San Francisco. Cheers, mouth breathers!

Jul 18, 2007 - 7:24 am DaMav:

Sounds like your vision is Pajamas as another CNN serving up liberal pablum and weak split the difference tea. I’m sure you’ve done your market studies too.

Jul 18, 2007 - 7:36 am DixieKraut:

Bravo you seem to have acheived your objective as you have obviously irritated both ends of the spectrum. We do not need anymore sites that preach to the choir. We do need reasoned discussion of the issues facing this country that do not degenerate into (or start out as) flame wars. There is common ground on most issues; we will never find it if begin by assuming the other side is incapable of a rational thought.
The current farce in Congress is a good example of that.

Jul 18, 2007 - 8:38 am Nancy Heil:

Roger is wrong to call O’Reilly’s comments censorship. what is he thinking? What is missed in all comments on this matter (except one yesterday which showed details) is that George Soros is a big shareholder in Jet Blue. Can you say Move On? If he wants to spend his money to influence Jet Blue and lose riders, he has enough to throw at this without blinking.

Jul 18, 2007 - 9:45 am Fritz_Katz:

You said: “Advertising on Jihadist or Nazi sites or the like should not be countenanced. But, whatever you feel about it, the Daily Kos does not fit in this category.”

I beg to differ with you, Mr. Simon, and here’s my evidence that you are wrong. Do a search on the Pajamas media site: LittleGreenFootballs for “The Protocols of the Daily Kos” and you will see links to dozens blatant anti-semitic, pro-jehadi Kos diaries with thousands of very hateful postings.

You also “… admit largely to ignoring the Daily Kos”. Perhaps you’re also ignorant of the true pro-Jihadist and pro-Nazi nature of the Daily Kos.

Jul 18, 2007 - 9:55 am Justin Higgins:

I have to agree with an earlier commenter who says it’s our right as customers to make decisions based on JetBlue’s sponsorship of the Kossacks. I don’t fly United anymore because of delays, and I won’t fly JetBlue because they support these terrorist-emboldening losers.

Jul 18, 2007 - 11:53 am jvon:

I fully agree that JetBlue has the right to support Daily Kos.

I also have the right to never fly JetBlue again.

I think O’Reilly is right to call attention to it; if he’s arguing that they shouldn’t do it, that’s typical O’Reilly hyperventilating. I suspect they’ll find this does not help their business and stop it.

I have a feeling they found out through market research that most of their customers are Democrats. Wouldn’t be surprised. But are most of their customers radical leftists? Doubt it. And how many of the remaining chunk are right-wing enough to be offended by Kos, and object to their sponsorship?

That’s a big unknown.

Jul 18, 2007 - 1:38 pm chasemonster:

The kindergarten-kiddies over at the dailykos blog are all stomping their feet because the Big Bad Meanie Bill O’Reilly gave them a little taste of their own medicine.

You see, it wasn’t that long ago when all the little dailykos kiddies threw a big temper tantrum over some of the remarks made by that Big Bad Meanie Ann Coulter.

The little dailykos kindergarten-kiddies were flooding their poor little blog with plea after plea for everyone to please please call all of the sponsors on Ann Coulter’s site and tell them to stop associating themselves with such a Big Bad Meanie Woman, or else!

Here are just a few of their cries for help:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/3/7/132041/8216

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/3/4/105236/4618

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/4/16/95834/5076

Jul 18, 2007 - 1:43 pm Belgarath:

This is all blown WAY out of proportion. JetBlue gave 10 free tickets to this event and they were permitted to use the jetBlue logo as a sponsor of the ‘event’ JetBlue isn’t some huge corporate sponsor as O’Reilly would have you think. These types of tickets are given out ALL THE TIME and to various and sundry organizations who ask for them. I’d be willing to bet that Dave Barger didn’t even know JetBlue had given the tickets to this organization when he was ambushed. JetBlue doesn’t care about the political affiliation of their customers, but like any service industry, would appreciate more of them.

Jul 18, 2007 - 3:18 pm cynthia chadwell:

I think you are so wrong on the daily kos thing they are hateful people wanting the death of soilders my son is one of them think before you speak

Jul 18, 2007 - 3:41 pm Theodosa:

O’Reilly’s ambush journalism is disgusting. Could you imagine how angry he would have been if he would have been ambushed during the whole Andrea Mackris thing? or after than disgusting remark he made about Shawn Hornbeck? Maybe some jopurnalists should begin ambushing him, sooner than later.

He is completely out of line with his tactics, it’s shameful. Daily Kos has no more or no less as many kooks posting as Free Republic, HotAir, LGF and Ace of Spades. Daily Kos is no more pro-nazi that these sites, especially Freeperville, the most hateful cestpoll this side of the 9th gate of hell.

So what’s O’Reilly’s point other than reinforcing his idealogy. I mean really, this guy mainstreams Coulter and Malkin on his silly show, the babes of the Far Right Fringe for goodness sakes.

Spare us. The only people who can’t see it are the ones who vote R down the line every time.

Jul 18, 2007 - 10:11 pm jvon:

If it’s true that the sponsorship was just a one shot deal, then I agree that O’Reilly overreacted, and I also think this will be the last time JetBlue goes anywhere near it.
On a completely unrelated note, why is it that liberals can’t spell?

Jul 19, 2007 - 12:50 am Kaelri:

I’d like to explain a bit about how the Daily Kos actually works, to those who might not be entirely clear.

Most blogs are run by a small group of like-minded writers. Their ideas and actions represent the blog; they *are* the blog. Most allow the general public to post comments; some, such as Little Green Footballs, limit even that.

Kos is a bit different. Virtually anyone can register, and, after a short waiting period, post comments and “diaries” at will. New diaries are frequently controversial; even the ones that seem like they espouse “mainstream” liberal or progressive values almost always discussed and debated in the comments. Some diaries are even written in counterpoint to other diaries.

The point is that O’Reilly didn’t present a shred of evidence that the remarks he cited were in any way supported by either the community in general or its operators. I would guess that they were written by absolute nobodies in diaries that were virtually ignored by the rest of the site population. And even if the case is otherwise, it doesn’t change the fact that the Daily Kos’s content is generated by individuals, and it’s simply ludicrous to hold a their sponsors accountable for how a total John Doe decided to use their services.

You *can* make a case that Jet Blue shouldn’t be engaging in business deals that imply a political affiliation. But to call the Daily Kos some kind of bastion of extremist bile is like trying to smear Google because someone did a search for dirty bomb blueprints.

Jul 19, 2007 - 10:37 am Theodosa:

Kaelri, thanks for clarifying how it works. I have only read it a few times, it seems similar to RedState in the way it’s set up.

O’Reilly needs to stop, he’s making himself sick with his idealogy, he’s obsessed with those secular progressives you know….LOL.

The guy needs a taste of his own medicine when it comes to the ambush journalism. And no one on The Right or Left should support this behavior.

Jul 19, 2007 - 5:04 pm Peter W.:

By it’s contribution to DailyKos, Jet Blue, in effect, is sponsoring hate speech, which should not be supported by any responsible corporation. If you don’t think DailyKos practices hate and gutter journalism, then you haven’t read it. Bill O’Reilly was simply pointing that out, which is a responsible thing to do. Then we can all make up our minds about what to do with the information.

Jul 19, 2007 - 8:55 pm Theodosa:

yes but the problem is that Bill O’Reilly sort of bends the facts to favor his own partisan agenda.

I think we would all be better served with more honesty and less opinion from both sides of the aisle.

I just don’t get when and why all of this opinion became paramount.

It used to be that we had to tolerate opinion pieces from silly film critics, not we have to endure it from the Bill O’Reillys and the wackos that post anonymously on the internet.

And Peter W, an explanation about Daily Kos was posted by Kaelri. I suggest you read his post. Bill O’Reilly missed the boat.

Jul 19, 2007 - 10:01 pm Theodosa:

chasemonster, Ann Coulter was inappropriate, even Laura Ingraham, Michelle Malkin and Kevin McCullogh spoke out against her.

You don’t have to read Daily Kos or any Left leaning website to find people who oppose her, you can find them in droves on The Right. Oh yeah, i forgot to mention Jonah Goldberg - he fired her.

Jul 19, 2007 - 10:07 pm Kaelri:

Peter:

“If you don’t think DailyKos practices hate and gutter journalism, then you haven’t read it.”

Again, a statement like that is lacking specification, at best. The Daily Kos as a whole, as an individual entity, cannot “practice” anything. The closest thing the site has to a voice is Markos Moulitsas himself, and the small team of bloggers who have been chosen for the privilege of posting stories on the front page.

Outside that group, the field is open - anyone can write anything, and have it immediately published on the site, without pre-moderation of any kind. It’s like a message board, really - users are trusted with the privilege of starting and contributing to new topics of discussion, and moderators only step in when the need arises. Those times are few and far between - in an environment like dKos’s, any genuinely hateful or dishonest submission is jumped on by average members of the community.

For example: one of the examples from LGF’s “Protocols of Daily Kos” series was this diary (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/4/5/21466/17801), an obviously racist, tasteless, anti-Semitic monstrosity.

It’s easy to look at that tract, with the Daily Kos title image bannered across the top of the screen, and link the two ideologically. But that would be akin to the “gutter journalism” that you decry, Peter. Look in the comments that the diary received - uniformly horrified and offended. I think these progressive Democrats were even more disgusted than the LGF respondents.

This is what happens - this is exactly the kind of thing that I’m sure Bill O’Reilly exploited. An absolute nobody published a despicable diary and was unanimously reviled by the community - and yet, because his writing appeared on the site, others - may I call them hacks? - cherrypick that juvenile stunt as evidence with which to characterize the website and its community as a whole.

If you want to make up your mind based on the raw information, Peter, my advice to you is to simply read it for yourself. Put DailyKos.com in your bookmarks list, visit it once a day for a week or so, and look through both the front-page stories and the Recommended Diaries list. I’m sure you’ll disagree completely with their opinions, but I have no doubt that you will find the most prominent and respected dKos writers to be cogent, rational, passionate and principled - worthy leaders of their cause, no matter what you may think of that cause.

Jul 19, 2007 - 10:32 pm InsultComicDog:

O’Reilly takes a few random posts from what, essentially, is an open message board, and smears the site as a “hate site” based on what he digs up.

Jul 20, 2007 - 7:27 am bob:

People have the right to say what they want, in the USA. People also can take there business to who they want in the USA.
I am glad I live in the USA, where I do have a choice on where I spend my money for goods and services.
But I am sure if some people get there way the government will own everything.
God I love capitalism.

Jul 21, 2007 - 8:01 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed) remember personal info?
Comments: