Journalism is to Blog as Surgeon is to Dude Who Attempts to Dig Bullets Out With a Pocketknife From Fellow Jewelry Store Robber's Stomach In The Back Seat Of A Car
And, of course, we bloggers wouldn't have it any other way. Well, to be honest, I kinda wonder about that, but let's stick to the Monahan "piece" for a moment.
I have absolutely no dog in the NM State Auditor Race hunt. I couldn't care less about Democrat Jeff Armijo or whomever the Hell he's running against. In fact, mentioning anything NM political aside from the all-important Madrid/Wilson race seems distracting and frivolous. For instance, I tried to watch the ABQ City Council meeting last night on Channel 16, and, despite all those people during Public Comments bad mouthing Michael Cadigan (for reasons still unclear to me) like he had personally killed their children or something, all I could think about was how messed up I thought it was that Madrid was running a TV ad where Heather Wilson appears visually larger and more often than Madrid does.
Like I said, I don't care about Jeff Armijo. Still, reading Joe Monahan's "chatter" (note: that's the same term used by those NSA guys snooping info about Al-Qaeda) about Armijo's "problem" was disturbing. For those too lazy to click and read the link, here's the vague heart of the "matter":
The sources tread cautiously on the nature of the "situation," but say Armijo has been advised by Dem loyalists that an abandonment of his candidacy should be considered. The sources say that the problem does not involve business, but centers on "a personal relationship" of Armijo's.
There's another 250 words or so, but they continue just as cryptically as the sentence above. Nothing definitive and then a discourse on how the State Democrats might have to react to this new "ethics situation". It really gives the term "veiled innuendo" a new dimension.
Monahan's toe-dip into the world of possible libel brings up the following:
- What is the role of bloggers, and by what legal standards should they operate?
- Okay, that's a boring question...how about this one? Is this an affair we're talking about here? Joe Monahan..cough twice if it's an affair. Cough three times if it's a really kinky one.
- Who's running against Jeff Armijo? Okay, that one is answered in the Monahan piece but I ignored that entirely as I sought more dirt in the "story".
- I might be down on blogger journalism right now, but wasn't there a similar Manny Aragon story in the Tribune some months ago, right before the Highlands resignation stuff hit the fan? A story with a title like "Aragon Controversy Swirls Below Surface of Actual Journalism"? I looked over and over at the Trib site and can't find it, but I remember something like it. Can anyone help me out here?
- Yes, I do realize that JoeMonahan might be going heavy on the veiled innuendo here, but at least his post wasn't about John Mark Karr, or what John Mark Karr had to eat on the plane, or how many electrolysis treatments John Mark Karr has had, or included 20 minutes of embedded video of that Thai Air jet sitting on the runway/gate at LAX with John Mark Karr sitting in it.
And yes, I'm also wondering if it was a kinky affair or just the regular kind. That is, if it was an affair. Are you coughing, Joe? Was that a cough, or two coughs? Were you just clearing your throat?
3 comments:
Was this it?
"FBI investigating possible corruption [--]
Aragon's role in jail, courthouse construction is questioned"
By Susie Gran
Tribune Reporter...
July 12, 2006
"For weeks, rumors have swirled about a major investigation into what could be the biggest case of public corruption in New Mexico history.
At the heart are three of the largest public building projects in Bernalillo County and a name familiar to everyone in the state: Manny Aragon.
An FBI spokesman confirms agents have been gathering evidence, but he'll say little else."
....
http://www.abqtrib.com/albq/nw_local_state_government/article/0,2564,ALBQ_19859_4838760,00.html
Michelle: That's the one! I know the Trib story gets into "facts" and such, but the vague first paragraph about Manny involvement, and the lack of any real Manny tie-in to the "facts" left me wondering at the time of just why the Trib printed it.
But I've been accused of being naive before. And no, in the Trib's defense, the Manny piece doesn't have quite the level of innuendo veiling present in the Monahan entry. But enough to draw a comparison perhaps. Especially being in the "newspaper" and all.
Nice piece, BB. All that stuff swirling just beneath the surface is the stuff writers get sued for if they are specific about unprovable charges. The problem is there is nothing to "report" unless you are willing or able to dig it up yourself...so writers "report" the rumor. Some people out there do it all the time.
Post a Comment