Lots of people have made the correct point that it’s silly to think reporters ... should have no opinions. But beyond that, it’s silly to think reporters should not have opinions about the dynamics of opinion-formation – opinions about how prominent crazy people and spin doctors in the public sphere affect public discourse. And it’s silly to think reporters do not have a positive duty to act on these opinions, changing up their stance to counteract the influence of perceived craziness, the better to help their readers form sensible opinions.After those exposures, here's what one of the exposed, Henry, had to say:
If you believe that there is a Vast Left Wing Conspiracy ranged against conservatism, it must be very exciting to finally get your hands on the Top Sekrit archives of the shadowy network that you think Controls It All.What's with all the upper-case and misspelling, do you think? You don't suppose he's at all chagrined, do you? Maybe a little upset, even? But, I mean, wouldn't you think he'd agree with Holbo that the reporters at Daily Caller had "a positive duty to act" on their opinions, especially about the "dynamics of opinion formation"? Especially about "how prominent crazy people and spin doctors in the public sphere affect public discourse"? And now that they've helped Henry to form "sensible opinions", wouldn't you think gratitude would be more appropriate than snark?