Zur Rücktritts-Geschichte von CNN-Nachrichtenchef Eason Jordan ein interessanter Artikel von Nina Rehfeld in der FAZ.NET: Die Blogger sind los

Und zum selben Thema schreibt auch Rebecca Blood und bingt es auf den Punkt:

Weblogs are a great tool--but introduce them willy-nilly into organizations without understanding the ramifications, and you will get a willy-nilly result. That's sort of the definition of a disruptive technology, isn't it? Unfortunately, some of blogging's most influential promoters don't seem to fully understand that they have a tiger by the tail.

Und weiter:

Journalists are most culpable for what happened here. By reporting on the blogstorm without bothering to verify facts or to take responsibility for the charges being made--and mainstream media often does this with charges made by highly questionable sources--they gave the incident credibility it would never have had otherwise.

Traditional media will respond "It was being reported elsewhere--we were just reporting that it was being reported!" I would answer: "Grow up. With the emergence of the blogosphere, speculation is a commodity.

Traditional journalism's most important role remains the same: to report the facts, as best they are known, without being gamed by those who have an agenda.

[Via: Rebcca Blood - This was a witch hunt - Those writing about Eason Jordan have missed the most important angle ]