Mercurial

Found this little piece at CNet, lightly presenting blogs :

But that brings up another important distinction between blogs and the traditional news: blogs don't offer a guarantee of accuracy (other than peer review) or impartiality. If you get information from blogs, you run the risk of gathering misinformation, and bias is assumed.

Of course, we would have to assume Fox is fair and balanced, and neither NYT nor WaPo have issues with the conflict between contributors and government vs reporting. How many thousands were in the antiwar marches, again?
One of the things that make blogging interesting is, precisely, that accumulating reputation through the interaction with other fellow bloggers, it is extremely difficult to post "inaccuracies". And yes, there is a bias, easily identified, and most of the time with full disclosure. Try that acknowledgement from the major media outlets that depend on Northrop-Grumman.
Ms Molly doesn't get it.