Most unintentionally funny (and self-revelatory) lines I've read today

From the comments of "Jude" — whom I believe to be Jude Nagurney Camwell (a/k/a "Iddybud"), because she'd commented earlier there and has written similar things elsewhere — in a thread on Eason Jordan's downfall in Jay Rosen's blog:

We have to meet it [i.e., the threat from "blogstorm troopers"] dead-on, expose it for what it is, and weaken its freedom-crushing power.

It's all about ethics. With reason and strength of conviction, we need to drown this right-wing machine they're calling "new media" in the bathtub.

So stipulated! — that it's all about ethics, that is. However, some of us from outside the MSM happen to believe that following journalistic ethics actually forbid one from making up and publicizing defamatory claims of fact, and also require that journalists who've done so be held accountable.

In theory, at least, that also seems to be the position of the Society of Professional Journalists.  Its Code of Ethics demands in its first-listed item that journalists should "[t]est the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible." Under the heading "Be Accountable," the SPJ also opines that journalists should "[a]dmit mistakes and correct them promptly," "[e]xpose unethical practices of journalists and the news media," and "[a]bide by the same high standards to which they hold others."

(Other bits from the SPJ's Code of Ethics that also seem to me to be pertinent here:  "Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context." Also: "Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention." And: "Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.")

Perhaps someone should also explain to Ms. Camwell that many bloggers happen to believe that exercising free speech through blogging is the exact opposite of "freedom-crushing." To quote another recent post on this subject by someone far, far wiser than "Jude":

I will, however, explain to you where my passion comes in.

I am proud and happy to be a political blogger.

I am free to speak about issues which I believe are crucial to the health of our democracy and no one can fire me.

They can only target me for critcism [sic] .... I believe that’s a good thing. As President Bush would say, “Bring 'em on.”

Oopsies! That was also Jude Nagurney Camwell, also writing about Eason Jordan on "The American Street."

Ms. Camwell goes on there to write (boldface hers):

When I see blogs being used in a way in which I believe American journalism will approach another step closer to being pure propaganda, I will say so.

I’m saying so.

Well, Ms. Camwell, I have some trouble following that. Maybe it's just a syntax problem — an implied or assumed causal link between the way "blogs [are] being used" and "American journalism [approaching] another step closer to being pure propaganda." That linkage seems kinda dubious to me, ma'am. I always understood "propaganda" to be something dictated by a ruling elite, operating in absolute harmony of purpose under precisely dictated orders. I double-checked my spam blocker this morning just to be sure, and — nope, Karl Rove and the RNC still haven't even been trying to dictate what I blog about, much less what I think!

On the other hand, I'm feeling an unaccountable sensation of fear when I look at my bathtub since reading your comments. If there's a noise outside my door when I'm in the tub tonight, should I be worried that it's Karl — or that it's you, Ms. Camwell?

--------------------------

UPDATE (Mon Feb. 14 @ 11:10pm): As promised in her comment here, Ms. Camwell has published a well-tempered (if to me unpersuasive) reply on her own blog, to which I've left a comment as well. My tub no longer frightens me.