That brings me back to my point about blogs. Not all blog readers know the difference between pure unfiltered, unedited opinion and good old-fashioned solidly reported news. Yes, I know that bloggers lately have been credited with everything from drumming up mainstream media interest in the overlooked plight of missing black and Latino women to exposing any number of government hacks and mischief-makers. But much of what appears on many blogs is speculation, however well-informed.here's the funny thing: two night ago at drinking liberally, duncan black aka atrios mentioned the amy alexander interview. duncan said that one of his readers emailed him after the reader heard the interview on the radio. duncan himself didn't hear the interview, but the email apparently told him about the reference to atrios and kos as a bunch of back-slapping white guys. duncan thought it was funny that alexander assumed that markos was a gringo.
anyway, duncan added that he hadn't posted about the matter because he didn't hear the interview himself so he couldn't confirm what amy alexander really said. he was waiting to see if he could get a transcript first. i guess it took him a few days and it was only after he managed to confirm the matter that he went ahead and posted it.
which is why it's funny for amy to paint blogs like atrios as purveyors of "well-informed speculation." while i make no bones that my blog is mostly speculation (and not always all that well-informed, either), it seems like atrios took more care than amy to determine that he got his facts right before posting. hell, he even managed to get wolcott's name right.
