Quote:
Originally Posted by MsDemeanor
In the latest of a long line of things that conservatives do that bug me to no end, I'm deeply frustrated by their dismissive attitude toward serious journalism simply because of the source. "at Rolling Stone magazine for God’s sakes". Seriously? Some of the contributors to Rolling Stone have done some kick ass reporting, actual researched and thorough investigative reporting. Which is more than one can say for a lot of the MSM these days. If you disagree with the facts as presented, then argue the facts. But don't dismiss the whole thing simply because you don't approve of the publication.
|
It's funny that people are acting like Rolling Stone is some overgrown college newspaper with cache because it's been around for a long time. Just for giggles, I searched to see who--if anyone of note outside of Hunter S. Thompson--has ever written for Rolling Stone. Here are some of the more heavyweight ones:
Joe Klein -- Currently on the Council on Foreign Relations and a Guggenheim Fellow
Timothy Ferris -- Science writer (in fact, I'm currently reading his latest work "The Science of Liberty). Emeritus Professor at UC Berkeley (yay Cal Bears!)
Matt Taibbi -- Writer/Journalist. Most recently he wrote an exhaustive expose of Goldman Sachs
P.J. O'Rourke -- Writer and journalist
Does Rolling Stone have the same gravitas as, say, The Economist or Foreign Affairs? No, it doesn't. But that doesn't mean that RS is a fly-by-night samizdat being desktopped out of a garage by a group of kids who write articles in between bong hits.
Cheers
Aj