Second Blogger Leaves Edwards Camp
The second campaign blogger (though it turns out she wasn't hired as a blogger at all, rather a technical advisor) for the John Edwards campaign has stepped down from her position.
I regret to say that I have also resigned from the Edwards campaign. In spite of what was widely reported, I was not hired as a blogger, but a part-time technical advisor, which is the role I am vacating.
I would like to make very clear that the campaign did not push me out, nor was my resignation the back-end of some arrangement made last week. This was a decision I made, with the campaign's reluctant support, because my remaining the focus of sustained ideological attacks was inevitably making me a liability to the campaign, and making me increasingly uncomfortable with my and my family's level of exposure.
I feel that these two bloggers are setting an extremely bad precedent, though it may not be entirely their fault. By resigning they send the signal that bloggers can be used as an opening to attack candidates and possibly be viewed as a liability by the candidates themselves. She goes on to address this by saying:
I understand that there will be progressive bloggers who feel I am making the wrong decision, and I offer my sincerest apologies to them. One of the hardest parts of this decision was feeling as though I'm letting down my peers, who have been so supportive.
Sadly actions speak louder than words and I feel that the legitimacy of blogs in politics has suffered a great blow. What effects, if any, this will have are yet to be seen.
Source: Shakespeare's Sister
4 comments:
These were not independent bloggers. They were employees of the Edwards campaign. As employees, everything they do reflects on the campaign. Even if their day job was not blogging, they still reflect on the campaign.
Their comments were received negatively by a vocal set of voters. They (and all bloggers) should think about what they say, and the impact it will have on their job.
Ironically, they got it right in the end. Their staying on the job would only serve to place them as a lightning rod for future attacks. They were right to leave, hopefully we can get back to looking at Edwards, not the people working for him.
Anyone working on a campaign needs to watch what he/she says. I'm totally independent, I can say what I want. You won't catch me saying anything about my company or my customers. It's just not good for long term employment. It's not good for me, it's not good for my company.
These comments were said long before they were hired. I also believe that the comments should be read in their full context and that a person who has a history of saying things like Hollywood is ran by Christianity hating Jews has any business calling someone else's comments offensive.
I get what your saying but these bloggers were independent when they said these things.
You can read the most cited post by the critics here
When the comments were made relative to their hire is irrelevant (see exception below). The comments still reflect on Sen Edwards.
I have not read the bloggers comments so I won't comment on how offensive they might be. However, several people found them offensive. Enough that it upset Sen. Edwards' apple-cart.
Sen. Edwards has (had) a choice. Either denounce what these people said or agree with it (I think he did, but not sure). They have a choice, they can continue to blog or stop.
In today's world, everything is on the internet. Don't say anything that you wouldn't want coming back to you. Ask Sen Trent Lott about his views on Strom Thurmond. Ask VP Quayle his views on Murphy Brown (views that were later agreed to by both other major candidates).
Here's the exception about when they were hired and when the comments were made. If the comments were made before they were hired, why didn't Sen. Edwards cull them out before they were hired? Most likely, he never saw them. There's too much history to go through. But if he wants to be "The Decider", he might as well get used to it. To misquote a previous decider said, the buck stops there.
I guess our disagreement on this stems from our differing views on the role of a campaign blogger. I've always felt that once someone is hired to blog for a candidate then their own opinions are forfeit and they become a mouthpiece for the campaign itself. It would be a whole different situation if these comments had appeared on the Edwards blog. I think Edwards tried to clarify that when he announced that they wouldn't be fired.
The comments these girls made seem to be in line with those of a radio "shock jock" like Howard Stern, controversial to make a point or incite debate. I highly doubt that they were intended solely as a cheap shot at the Catholic religion. I will concede however that they said some things that I probably wouldn't have but nothing that the apologies that the each issued shouldn't have covered.
Post a Comment