2006 Prediction #1: The Revenge of Jayson Blair

Prediction #1: The Revenge of Jayson Blair

The blog-o-sphere has had a field day in recent years with the peccadilloes and errors of professional journalists, or the MSM as bloggers like to disparage them.

All this low-rent schadenfreude will come back to haunt bloggers in 2006 when a major blog is hit with correct Blair-esque allegations of having twisted the truth and made shit up.

Which blog? Check the top thirty in the Technorati 100. It will be one of them.


  1. I have no doubt you’re correct, but the difference is that if bloggers ‘make shit up’, we won’t need to listen to long-winded justifications about their value as a public service, etc…
    Rather (pun intended), they’ll just go away.

  2. I’m not convinced someone will make something up. I’m more convinced that some dumb blog fiend will suck something up and blow it out without checking any facts that may be present.
    But then as the saying goes: Why let the facts get in the way of a good story?

  3. the blogosphere is much more ruthless about winnowing down the signal to noise ratio. there are no “grey lady” sacred cows with institutional egos…bloggers know its strike one, you’re out.

  4. strange… when i read about “twisting the truth and making shit up” and the name Blair i thought Tony Blair. who the fuck is Jayson Blair?

  5. Justice Litle says:

    If this prediction comes true, would it really be such a bad thing for the blogosphere?
    The old gray lady already bit that particular bullet (making shit up), and she is the ‘standard’ — so who would be truly surprised if one bad apple blogger did it too? Forbes couldn’t very well holler about what they’ve already insinuated loudly. The response would be “What, bloggers are untrustworthy NOW? You already said that in a cover story assasination piece. What’s new?”
    If the ensuing firestorm resulted in a high publicity comparison of content value between mainstream media and bloggers, methinks the bloggers would come out far ahead. If consumers were thus encouraged to scrutinize ALL data sources, rather than blithely believe any one source, that might favor bloggers even more.
    Any press is good press as some like to say, and the credibility stranglehold of the dead tree press has nowhere to go but down…

  6. I betcha it’d be someone who isn’t even blogging yet, but makes a rapid ascent to the top of the technorati 100.
    That’s the typical profile, isn’t it? Someone comes from nowhere, they have a meteoric rise, then *poof* it turns out to have been based on bunk.

  7. i agree with grumpy. there are no sacred cows to slaughter in the blogosphere.
    few blogs have statistically significant readership (in the Nielsen sense), hence there’s not much room to fall in reputation.
    if there was a major error on a blog, another blog would be the one to call them out on it…because MSM assumes most blogs are just error-prone ramblings anyway.
    and if a blog corrected the major error…one blog would gain status while another lost it…so the blogosphere preserves its overall integrity.
    if we made a big prediction about blogs in 2006, I would wager that MSM takes individual blogs more seriously…putting them on Meet the Press, or even taking prolific bloggers and giving them TV shows, etc. newspaper sections of blog posts.

  8. My money’s on Malkin.

  9. It seems like this kind of things already happens all the time. Boing Boing has to be one of the absolute worst offenders of ‘fire first, ask questions later’. But there is very little fall out. Even with Blair was there much fallout? Did the NYT lose a ton of readership? I frankly, as a subscriber, didn’t care. Never read his articles.