THANKS TO THE MIRACLE OF SCHEDULED POSTING, new stuff will keep popping up today. But I’m en route to Minnesota where I’ll be a TV pundit for Pajamas TV. It should be fun. I’ve never been to a political convention, and never planned to go to one, but how often do you get to be a TV talking-head at a national political convention? And I think this Internet TV thing has a future, so it’s fun to see it at the beginning. [Are they paying you to do this? -- ed. As much as I get paid for any of the TV appearances I do! Which means, er, no.]

M

But like Jeffro, Instapundit and I have “grown apart.” As in, he contributes the “grow” and I contribute the “apart.” On the one hand, it’s not my time that’s being wasted so it’s easy for me not to care. On the other hand, people who let their time be wasted, arguably have a different kind of caring problem.

I also don’t have much of an opinion one way or the other about PJM. I thought the name cute when I first heard it, and if I gave it a second thought itn was probably … now.

I couldn’t tell you the last time I visited Insty. A link and “heh” just don’t cut it for me. I’d rather read someone’s writeup about some issue than seeing a “hey look at this” link.

But, apparently that’s just me, considering the traffic he gets.

And, after reading Steve H.’s (of Hog on Ice) rants about PJM, I’ve no use for the whole thing.

True, that.

Would identifying the paid links more plainly — say, a [Paid Link] indicator next to the permalink — be satisfactory, or are more drastic steps called for?

I see. What we’re not told, though, is the REASON for the URL change. We know what PJ gets out of it (even though the site is NOT upfront and does not say why this was done), but what does Reynolds get from the change? And what does he get from all his redirection of traffic to PJ Media?

Then there’s the matter of the flood of Amazon links. Does he love Amazon so much that he now links to pitches for products he knows nothing about, just ’cause he’s a nice guy? But what about the reader, who’s following Reynolds recommendations? Doesn’t the reader have the right to know that Reynolds is paid to place these links?

“As for Amazon, anyone and his sock-puppet-in-law can earn affiliate points”

Yes. And this relationship is made transparent on their blogs or Amazon links. Not so on Reynolds’ blog, though. The Amazon links look like any other link.

I don’t care if he gets paid. By all means, if he can get paid, that’s great. But don’t pretend a link was placed out of merit when it’s actually an ad. That, in fact, is exactly the sort of thing Reynolds has complained about at length in the past.

As you know, I’ve also said that just because a blogger is NOT paid, doesn’t mean he doesn’t have a hidden agenda.

“I don’t assume that an Instapundit link to something necessarily implies an endorsement or recommendation beyond the simple “Hey, take a look at this.”

OK. But Reynolds’ self-implication and press coverage from Day One has been that ‘I post about the things in which I believe’. In fact, I would guess that your loyal readers assume that your blog, also, reflects your beliefs, and that you are not engaging in the practice Reynolds himself derides as Astroturfing. That is – an agenda posing as ‘grass roots’, or (in this case) paid ads pretending to be posts.

“If it’s under the table, how come it’s so easy to see?”

It’s a glass table. Not much of a disguise, never said it was. But even THAT is rather insulting – it’s as if they’re telling me either (a) our sh·t doesn’t stink (like everyone else’s does), (b) you’re too stupid to see through our ruse -so why bother disguising it, or (c) you’re either too compromised or cowardly to call us on our hypocrisy.

My gripe is that Reynolds (and PJ Media) does this while complaining bitterly whenever people they AREN’T in league with do it.