skippy the bush kangaroo: skippy asks for due diligence

Saturday, June 17, 2006

skippy asks for due diligence

it's bad enough that some of our favorite blogs are happily taking money from the very telco's that want to shut down net neutrality (we aren't).

but we are disheartened that mydd, co-written by matt stoller, the man who inspired skippy so greatly on this subject during a panel at ykos, is running the ad without so much as a disclaimer or even a "boo."

we asked matt, in a slightly-related post, how he could justify such a move. he simply replied:

why should the telcos only fund the bad guys? it's not like it's influencing the blogging.

to which we replied:

yeah, we don't really see that as a justification. also, we think it's a bit flip, and our participation and support of you and your blog, and progressive blogging in general for the past four years, we think, deserves a bit more than that.

you say it's about money, we want to know how you three guys, after being so adamant about net neutrality, help the other side propagate their false information by endorsing their ads by having it on your site? especially if it's just about money.

how can you guys expect any legitimacy to be ascribed to you by your readers the next time you take a position that the other side is inconsistent?

if you seriously needed money, we could have given you some. but we don't think it's about money.

we think you guys didn't really think it through. you now look like hypocrites, you really do, and it saddens us, because we know you guys are working hard to make things better for this country. but this looks to us to be a serious mis-step.

at least talkleft and atrios and fdl and other blogs who are carrying the ad posted that they still believe otherwise (we don't think that solves the problem, but at least they are making an effort to deal with the apparent conflict of interest). and steve gilliard and annatopia have pledged to take the money from that ad and donate it to savetheinternet.com. and we just refused to carry it.

you say "it's not like it's influenced the blogging." actually, we believe you. but there is still the appearance of a conflict of interest. it seriously undermines your credibility when debating the other side's inconsistencies on any other matter.

and, as e've said elsewhere, of all the issues to run an ad from the opposing side for profit, it's the stupidest move possible to take money from the very people that want to limit your ability to reach your audience.

again, we challenge you to justify, not to us, but to every reader of mydd, your reasons for taking money from a sponsor with whom you espouse a position that is diametrically opposed to that which the ad dictates.

especially after you spoke so passionately and eloquently against this very position at ykos. it just really leaves a bad taste in the readers' mouths.

we call upon the writers of mydd, as leaders in this movement, to re-think their position.

posted by skippy at 11:37 PM |