I have read much more about the Gannon/Guckert situation in recent weeks than Eason Jordan, primarily because, at least what I've seen, the latter story seems to consist of more he said/he said, while the Gannon/Guckert story is a marvel of good, basic reporting: people noting his copying of GOP documents and using them in his "reporting", to finding the link to a Republican organization, to using his email address to uncover his real name, to finding his AOL page, to discovering the gay "escort" pages. The bloggers have acted as real journalists, just as Woodstein did back in the day. What have most -- not all, the Boston Globe being a particular exception -- of the mainstream press done? Ignore it or, when it became too big to ignore, criticize bloggers.
By John Amato — February 9, 2005