More tarnish on the American Lung Association imagePosted by Craig Westover | 4:54 PM |
Well, Bob Moffitt from the American Lung Association reveals once again why I don’t have any respect for him as a professional communicator (aside from the fact that he does not understand irony).
Based on the article in the Pioneer Press, MNspeak has a comment string going on the impact of political blogs. Bob takes the opportunity to lift my comments from the Pioneer Press article and add his spin -- with a total disregard for reality.
Westover, as is his wont, fails to detect the rich irony of using a newspaper interview -- the same newspaper that publishes his column, no less -- to declare the MSM lazy and obsolete.Craig Westover, who blogs at craig westover.blogspot.com and contributes to the Pioneer Press opinion pages, says he and his fellow bloggers are outworking the traditional media outlets on this big story, devoting more time and attention.If this happens, Craig, who is going to PAY for your lunch?
"They're going to eat the newspapers' lunch,"
First, I never called the MSM “lazy” or “obsolete.” Blogs are out working the MSM on the Senate and District 6 races, but that doesn’t make the MSM “lazy.” They have neither the staff nor the dedicated time to commit to the races that blogs do. Consequently, they are being outworked on that story. Nor did I say that the MSM is obsolete. Far from it. Had Bob followed the link from the article on the PiPress Web site, he’d have found the complete context of my quote --
"They're going to eat the newspapers' lunch," he said. Blogs are outworking the newspapers and will own the 2006 elections. "What blogs can do is that blogs can push a story back in the mainstream media," he said. "That's how blogs affect the elections."So what is the gist of Bob’s comments?
First, he spins my language by attributing words to me that I did not use -- like labeling a non-smoker “pro-smoke” or calling anyone that presents objective data a "minion of Big Tobacco" as if those were logical arguments. Second, he does incomplete research so that he doesn’t get the whole story -- like reading the executive summary of a scientific study and not the raw data.
But most interesting of all, Bob finds fault with me for not putting my pay check above the truth. Apparently, Bob’s idea of professional communication is to say what your're paid to say regardless of what the truth might be. That explains a lot about the way he communicates about the smoking ban and his inability to defend his position with more than the utterance -- “Nevermore.”