I began to wonder if the watchdog blog was simply a place where unresearched stories could be ran (assuming they were written by readers). I have to say that I agree with the Courant in that anything you ran on your blog should’ve gone through the same process as something ran in print. Im not talking about blog comments like this one (I cant imagine anyone really caring about that), but rather blog posts, posted by you.

The Pricechopper complaint turned out to be a mistake by the consumer, but because there wasn’t any followup on this no one caught it. There was a confusing followup post by you barely acknowledging the mistake. I thought to myself, this is hardly fair to Pricechopper, and it was poor journalistic style, similar to tabloids where any stray letter can run as a story.

If the Courant was telling you to treat advertising companies differently than non-advertising companies, than that is unacceptable and the story needs to be further exposed. However, I do think the issues need to be seperated as I agree that having unresearched items ran on your blog was poor journalism.

In this day and age, if management is not availing themselves of every resource regarding best practices in electronic journalism and social media, then clearly, the onus is on them, and not you, George. It’s worth mentioning (and in the name of full disclosure) that I’ve noticed a job posting at the Courant for someone to “teach” the staff about blogging and social media — I don’t know if the job has been filled, yet. I’ve deliberately stayed away from applying for the job, though this is my professional bailiwick, because of anticipated conflicts *just* like the debacle that ultimately led, unfairly, to your termination.

Because readership and subscription to the Courant is, presumably, down, there is now a deeply asymmetric relationship between readers, journalists (that includes bloggers!) and advertisers. The tail is definitely wagging the dog now.

If the Courant is more responsible to its advertisers than it is to its readers, it has just lowered itself to a community coupon flier status, and is no longer interested in journalism. It is just as well that you should no longer be associated with them.

Best of luck here in your independent enterprise, where you can, rest assured, be followed by your fans and those who respect your reputation and accomplishments.

Didn’t they tell you that you are only allowed to “Tell It Like It Is” about everybody else? Well, at least the ‘everybody else’ category that doesn’t include the shrinking world of Courant advertisers.

Or Courant editors. Or Channel 61 personnel? Or their friends. And their pets. And their next door neighbor’s cousin’s brother’s roommate’s co-workers.

Now, is that clear? I’m glad we’ve had this little discussion. I hope it has been helpful and sets the tone “going forward.”