Armstrong Williams

Well here is a big story breaking across the blogosphere. If you have been living under a rock, Armstrong Williams accepted money from the Department of Education to publically back the No Child Left Behind act using his TV show and Column. Instapundit, Jeff Jarvis, Q and O, and Left2Right should represent a good overview of coverage.

Lots has been written. Just a few thoughts on the coverage:

• Is it just me or can you basically pinpoint someones political affiliation by looking at who the scandal is attributed to? If this scandal is mostly attributed to "the Bush administration" its a liberal. If Williams and the Department of Education are being railed at: conservative. Note I am not blaming Bush directly or indirectly, so draw the proper conclusions.
• What makes this case more prominent than some in the past is that Williams was explicitly paid for airtime. This is not a case of "hey we agree, let me contribute to you financially or purchase some ads." This was a business arrangement. Its partisan payola.
• Williams was a partisan commentator not a true "unbiased" journalist. Thankfully the blogosphere is drawing the proper conclusions of "hey we're all partisan hacks too, how long before some of us get offers?" Note that several bloggers have already been on the payroll of partisan organisations (DailyKos was criticised for accepting DNC money last year, Atrios turned out to be paid by a thinktank). The money floating around the blogosphere has been of the "you pat my ideological back, I'll pat yours" persuasion, not direct payment for a given amount of coverage.
• People are wondering about journalistic ethics in general. This is a good thing since of the professions of public interest, journalists have very little in the way of hard professional standards. There are lots of soft suggestions about them from journalist organizations, but there isn't a licensing body that can really make standards stick. Lawyers, doctors, accountants, engineers, and others do not get off so lightly.