I mean, it seems like you live to hype blogs' significance, and now you're downplaying an evocative (if not terribly substantial) "bloggers fact-check the best known journalist in the US" story?

I really don't know Anil from Adam, but what I do know suggests that he is an evangelist not a triumphalist.

Right now we're all just arguing about "justification" and character shapes ... this might be significant, but it might turn out to be a case of ignorant techies imagining that modern civilization (and its technological comforts) started in the 1980s.

And I'd prefer it if such attention was focused on more important media coverage. But hey, you've got to start somewhere.

So why is Anil knocking them?

I guess the short answer is, I'm trying to hold bloggers to *higher* standards these days. I think we can do better than focusing on tiny details at the expense of the bigger picture.

How on Earth can the public form themselves a good opinion about the candidates intentions, leadership, ability to make laws, compromise and legislate if they can't even trust an institution like CBS?

That's no detail, is it? And the fact that it was discovered by 'a bunch of twerps in pajamas' makes it all the more interesting ;-)