Print This Post Print This Post

Thanks to Mike Gesing for sending me a link to this post by Terry Heaton on The PoMo Blog. In that post, Heaton compares and contrasts about how one newspaper might say that financial support is verboten, but another one gives ink to what amounts to just as much if not more support:

These two stories are different sides of the same coin, and they both make a case for the return of argument to journalism. They point out the silliness of the line between personal, paid support and corporate editorial support. Purists will argue that the person who wrote the Post editorial didn’t or hasn’t supported an opponent of the governor, but I would argue that this is semantics because support is support, whether its in the form of cash contributions or otherwise. Others will argue that the Post editorial was well thought out and agreed upon by the editorial board of the paper — that elite group of educated and informed people who guide the decisions of the paper. No name-calling; just thoughtful prose. Not.

The best part of his blog, however, is at the very top of his left-hand sidebar, where you can see the word “Transparency” over his face. Click on it and start to read:

I am employed by Audience Research & Development, and my writing is considered a work-for-hire. That means AR&D “owns” the blog, but I maintain it. However, the ideas and opinions expressed herein are mine alone and are not necessarily those of AR&D. The company has given me the freedom to keep expressing myself, and I accept the responsibility that comes with such liberty. [emphasis mine]

Now that is a beautiful thing.

Sigh of relief.

See???? There are people and companies and money-making ventures that get it. And give it – trust that is. To the readers and the writers.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:21 am November 9th, 2007 in Blogging, Business, Marketing, Media, Wide Open, Writing 

Comments

Comments are closed.

"));