The Feedback Loop

At Daily Kos, Georgia10 takes exception to Cohen:

"The whole angry left myth is a copout, an escape-hatch for those who are confronted by fact and choose to respond by attacking the messenger rather than the message. It's a cowardly tactic that originated on the radical right (see Malkin and the moonbats); lately, we have seen its use on the rise in the traditional media. It is, indeed, a pathetic diversionary tactic. Instead of addressing the substance of the critique, those who use the easy-out 'angry left' defense avoid addressing the true issue at hand.

"This obsession with form over substance is the hallmark of political analysis these days. Instead of addressing the substance of Colbert's critique, Cohen's first column obsessed over the form of its delivery. And now, he wastes a second column whining about the tone of emails he received, instead of addressing the substance of his readers' complaints. The nature of the modern medium ensures that any critique by internet users -- conservative and liberal alike -- will be massive, unfiltered, and instantaneous.

"And it will always be effortless to cherry-pick intense or inappropriate comments or emails and use them to dismiss an entire dissenting view as nothing more than the angry rants of a disillusioned group."

There's an angry right, too, you know.

Public Eye guy Vaughn Ververs also enters the fray:

"At the risk of running this topic into the ground, it follows my argument that the blogosphere is risking marginalization if it is perceived as a cauldron of anger rather than a repository of thought-provoking conversation. How that perception is fostered is up for discussion-- many bloggers would argue that those in the MSM focus only on the tone of the discussion at the expense of the more valuable contributions . . .

"I think Cohen's view of interactivity as a 'silly pretense' shows a thin skin and is an example of severe over-reaction. But those pounding on the gates of the old media establishment should ask themselves how best to get in, to establish themselves as an important part of what should be a real conversation.

"Journalists are notoriously thin-skinned and averse to the kinds of criticisms they level at others. Fair or not, that's the reality of the situation. How bloggers deal with that reality is up to them. Journalists ought to be able to deal with criticism of their work regardless of how that criticism is voiced. The fear is that, in dealing with personal attacks, wild charges and 'verbal sewage,' they will stop listening altogether and news organizations will pull back their nascent attempts at participating in the conversation. That would be a loss for all."

Oh no. Not another new poll claiming that Bush is at a new low. Wait, this really is a new low, 31 percent in the New York Times :

"Just 13 percent approved of Mr. Bush's handling of rising gasoline prices. About a quarter said they approved of his handling of immigration, as Congressional Republicans try to come up with a compromise for handling the influx of illegal immigrants into the country.

"The poll showed a further decline in support for the Iraq war, the issue that has most eaten into Mr. Bush's public support. The percentage of respondents who said going to war in Iraq was the correct decision slipped to a new low of 39 percent, down from 47 percent in January. Two-thirds said they had little or no confidence that Mr. Bush could successfully end the war. . . .