This site may not be the best written blog in the sphere, but, shit, at least I wrote the damn thing myself.
Clooney on Huffington:
What she most certainly did not get my permission to do is to combine only my answers in a blog that misleads the reader into thinking that I wrote this piece. These are not my writings — they are answers to questions and there is a huge difference.
And Clooney’s representative, Stan Rosenfield: “I read (Arianna’s) response. This wasn’t a misunderstanding. It was misrepresentation.”
Ouch.
read more | add new comment | source |full article | [IMG delicious] delicious | [IMG digg] digg | [IMG reddit] reddit | [IMG technorati] technorati
I was willing to agree that Huffington had acted unethically until I read the piece. It seems clear that it’s the publicist mistakenly gave George Clooney’s ‘permission’ for the pieces to be combined into a blog entry.
I don’t think what Huffington did was enethical (come on, where talking about blogging), so much as it was dishonest and deceptive.
The intent of the posting was to make it look as if George Clooney wrote that Blog post, much the way 99% of Huffington’s other bloggers do.
Who cares? He looks good but I could care less what he says, much less Huffinpuffer. heehee
Well, Robbie, if that’s your beef- I actually don’t have a problem with Huffington’s ‘people’ compiling Clooney’s actual words into a blog entry. This is a more authentic ‘voice’ than you get from anyone who uses a speechwriter or a ghost writer- both widely considered acceptable.
On an unrelated note: you might find this discription of the work of Media Matters to be interesting: http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2006/03/17/publiceye/entry1414928.shtml
It captures much of my feelings about the ‘bias’ of the media.