That’s not in the best interests of the readers at home or the politicians, says columnist Michael Tomasky, writing online for The Guardian. He suggests that bloggers could use just a few standards, such as seeking follow-up comment from each side of the story, allowing campaign aides to clarify a candidate’s comment, and disclosing political donations at the bottom of each post.
Tomasky’s fear seems to be that in the Lord of the Flies world of up-to-the-minute campaign blogging, citizen reporters have destroyed a candidate’s ability to speak frankly with campaign aides and supporters. Their reports require little, if any, burden of proof, he points out.
So have citizen campaign blogs helped or hurt campaign coverage? And is a lack of candidate privacy harmful to the republic? What do you think?