NPR ombudsman Jeffrey Dvorkin discusses a Pentagon report issued in the form of a PDF file that was insecurely redacted (blacked out). The insecure file made it possible to retrieve the hidden information, which some people did and then posted online. Dvorkin uses the occasion to smear the entire blog world. So, following in his spirit of painting an entire segment of society with a broad brush, I will engage in Dvorkin’s game.

[T]he blogosphere has proven once again to be an amoral place with few rules. The consequences for misbehavior are still vague.

As opposed to what? CBS News? The consequences for misbehavior there are hard to determine, since the head of CBS News is firmly in place, and an aging Dan Rather was allowed to keep his job for six months after airing a bogus report and then defending it for days. The only people who paid consequences were the no-name, relatively low-level hacks who did the grunt work. The people in charge of the actual vetting process, the professionals that supposedly separate the trustworthy establishment media from the fast-and-loose, wild west world blogging paid no price at all.

Actually, even though none of the honchos paid a price, CBS News did, and paid dearly: the damage to the network’s reputation will persist for years. And in the news media, where the only lasting currency is trust, that’s really the only consequence that counts. The thing is, the exact same rules apply in the online world. Get busted doing something bogus, and good luck getting your reputation back. The guilty have nowhere to hide in the world of Google searching and historical caches like the Wayback Machine.

The possibility of civic responsibility remains remote. It is a place where the philosophy of “who posts first, wins” predominates.

Again, as opposed to what? The establishment press places a premium on breaking news and getting exclusives. And when they make mistakes, they often blame it not on ideological bias (despite the fact that I rarely recall liberal Democrats getting burned by sloppy reporting) but on a rush to get a story out first. That’s apparently what led a New York Times reporter to promise one side of a story that nobody from the other side would be contacted: in order to get an exclusive.

Despite the shoddiness and complete unprofessionalism of the blogosphere, Dvorkin cites an odd example to bolster NPR’s blog cred:

Even one of NPR’s newest programs, Day To Day is collaborating with Slate.com, the online magazine.

Hey, look, kids! Daddy-O is hip to the scene, man! He listens to all the grooviest music like The Monkees.

Excuse me for cluing in the square guy, but online, you can’t get much more establishment than Slate, a web magazine funded by Microsoft and founded by current L.A. Times editor Michael Kinsley. Nor does the Slate association help NPR’s case as far as perceived bias goes. The closest fixture Slate has to a conservative is self-described Democrat (and must-read) Mickey Kaus.

The appeal of the blogs? Humor seems to be the biggest attraction. Ironic detachment from the news, an ability to deflate egos and refreshing, undisguised opinion are also valued.

Whereas in the establishment media, disguised opinions seem to be valued...

American newspapers traditionally and scrupulously segregate fact-based reporting from opinion by designating pages for each.

Hahahahahahahaha! Pardon me while I wipe up the coffee I just spat all over my monitor.

The blogs entertain, they provoke, and they are not constrained by journalistic standards of truth telling.

Has Mr. Dvorkin been sleeping for a few decades? Journalists don’t seem “constrained by journalistic standards of truth telling.”

At least the blogosphere doesn’t claim to be something it isn’t. The establishment media constantly assures us of its fail-safe editorial processes and vigorous fact-checking, yet we still see example after example where journalists have let their opinions drive their coverage of the news. Blogs are being honest about shoveling opinion, whereas the professional journalists continue to issue shopworn platitudes about a pristine objectivity that’s probably not even possible in the first place.

Perhaps these younger people will outgrow these youthful informational indiscretions and come to their senses — and back to media that can serve them best...

And while you’re at it, remember to buy from Amalgamated Buggy Whip. Don’t believe Henry Ford’s hype! Those so-called “automobiles” are absolute death traps. Why pour some putrid exploding liquid into a hard-to-understand machine when you can motivate your stately equine conveyance with one of our nice-smelling leather cords!

Dvorkin closes his column by quoting some big media editors who apparently hate getting e-mail. Here’s a solution: if you in the establishment media think you’d be better off by ignoring your customers, stop giving out your contact information. Step back even further from the people who consume your product. Go ahead. I dare you.