Talk:Instapundit
I removed the NPOV complaint, because the person who put in here failed to mention what the issue was, and there doesn't seem to be any problem with the article. user:TimShell
I've noticed that this article and the Little Green Footballs one are fairly negative and looking for bias, while the article on Daily Kos isn't. There should be more on that site's failings as well. user:Mtnerd
- I agree. Could you write about Daily Kos's failings, please? Andris 04:21, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)
- I don't read the Daily Kos, but all internet sites, including this one, play to their audiance to an extent. That can't be helped, but people should be aware of that. Mtnerd 04:16, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Kos has been known to make particualrly inflammitory statements on his blog. His most notable came after the two civilian contractors were brutally killed and dismembered in Fallujah, saying "They are there to wage war for profit. Screw them."
Wingnut?
If the mild-mannered Glenn Reynolds is a "wink nut", then wouldn't it be fair to describe extremists like Markos Zuniga as "moonbats" or some such?
Agreed, Reynolds is anything but a wink nut.
I think it was "wingnut," and Glenn is certainly not one of those. While I'm sure it is more than tempting for the junior highers out there to post cute little slurs against famous blogs, such does a disservice to the usefulness of this Project.
Paid promotion
- WARNING gratuitous innuendos follow.... ( which, of course, have absolutely no reason to be in Wikipedia)
Looks like someone didn't like it, but it was a fair point that there are allegations that Reynolds took cash from Nick Denton to promote one of Denton's blogs. ( even if true: so? Reynolds makes no secret of the fact that he sells advertising, and hardly claims to be an unbiased source of TRVTH. He runs an opinion site, for cripes sake).
I remember seeing those full-color banner ads in Reynolds' posts and thinking at the time that he had never done that before. Never saw him do it again, either. Perhaps someone should mention that right as Denton began his campaign, Reynolds started running the out-of-character ads.
Can we get some more info on this? its news to me and I dont remember seeing the ads.
Yup. Here's the link to the post where it looks like Reynolds started plugging Wonkette (with her banner ad in the post itself): http://instapundit.com/archives/013684.php
Here's the link to the post he used to plug her the next day: http://instapundit.com/archives/013695.php
Here's another link to her two days later: http://instapundit.com/archives/013750.php
Oops, another on the same day: http://instapundit.com/archives/013750.php
Ummm, another on the same day? http://instapundit.com/archives/013754.php
Hmmm, would you believe another the next day? http://instapundit.com/archives/013776.php
And two days later: http://instapundit.com/archives/013805.php
O.K., the daily plugs seem to be done about a week after it began: http://instapundit.com/archives/013873.php
Actually, the links kept coming very regularlyu every other day or three for a while, with some days getting two or three links to the fabulously lucky Wonkette. It looks like the first week Wonkette was in existence, Instapundit linked to her almost every day or multiple times per day, and ran her full color banner ad in a plug. I don't recall him ever running a banner ad for someone, and I KNOW that he has never given any new blog that kind of coverage. I'd be seriously surprised if Reynolds had linked to any other blog that many times in the course of a month, his own included.
Did Denton pay him? Who knows, I certainly don't ( ED ~ no reason to let that stop you !) ( Right. If it's a good story about someone whose politics you don't like, that fully justifies vandalizing Wikipedia, or so this poster seems to believe.) But I recall hearing people talking about the new sports car Reynolds had just bought and how Denton was known to aggressively market his properties, like Wonkette. Even so, the only thing anyone could say bad about taking money to plug another website is not disclosing to your readers that you took the money makes them think you recommended the site based on merit. Otherwise, who cares? Welcome to the real world.
puppy smoothies?
I don't get it.... the sentence doesn't really make sense (at least to someone who hasn't heard those popular jokes), regardless of if it's true. Could somebody clarify that?
Its a joke started by the guy who runs the IMAO blog that claimed (he wasn't be serious) that Glenn Renyolds drank puppy smoothies as a evil energy drink. Renyolds took this in stride and plays along with this inside joke. ScottM 20:32, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
FrankJ made the joke as a satiric attempt to point out how others defame Glenn and then get a lot of traffic in the insuing discussion. Link to the original puppy blender article
The photo is actually photoschnappes
The 'I had an abortion' t-shirt is a photoshop job by Allah -
http://www.allahpundit.com/archives/000775.html
I almost feel bad pointing this out since it's such a funny picture!
- As Reynolds would say, "Heh." --Frank J. Fleming 19:06, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Pajamas
Surely these should have a mention somewhere?
Eh, the pajama thing was really a blogsphere thing, not specific to instapundit.
the picture
Adding an edited picture seems a bit juvenile.
Please remove the Repuglicans
Insulting the people you disagree with lends credence to all of the critics of wikipedia.
Objectivity
It is possible to present an objective account of the facts here, you know. Just state things as they are. When did Instapundit start? What subjects does it discuss? What kind of traffic does it receive? How has Instapundit influenced other blogs? What is unique about it? What role has Instapundit played in the overall development of the Blogosphere? Etc.
Of course some of these questions are open for deeper discussion. But the purported purpose of the Wikipedia is to provide a free repository of factual information regarding the subject. If you want to write a paper on how Instapundit is a tool of the Right Wing War Machine, do it on your blog. If you want to write about how Reynolds sticks it to the Dummocrats, again, do it on your own site. But if you want this Wikipedia to be worth anything, then please, exercise restraint and stick to the facts.
the "Repuglicans"
it's really amazing that this hasn't been removed... since when is a encyclopedia supposed to have political bias?
What about the Wingnut comment?
If LGF can be described without using such pejoratives, why not a relatively moderate site such as Instapundit?
"such Democratic platforms as civil unions, abortion rights, and stem cell research."
the "stem cell research" should be clarified a bit. I was going to suggest "embryonic stem cell research", but Republicans support that too and Bush funded it for existing lines. They just don't support taking new fetus' and using THOSE for embryonic stem cell research.
I would also suggest that we don't use blanket statements for either the Democrats or Republicans in either case, since the "platforms" sited above are hardly universally accepted or rejected by either party.
Id use conservative and liberal in place of republican and democrat unless you're talking about actually party candidates and supporting them. and the "wingnut" comment definitely goes. He's popular for a reason, many people share his moderate libertarian views listed above.
Advertising?
It's unclear to me why Reynolds possibly taking advert money from Denton is an issue. It's clear that Reynolds sells advertising --- there is a whole column of blogads, plus an "Advertise on this site" link, plus an Amazon tipjar. I am thus shocked, shocked to hear he might be taking money for advertising.
Why does this entry even exist?
If someone wants to find out about instapundit, why don't they just go to his website?
Because then they only find out what Reynolds says about Instapundit.
I am appalled. I thought there were editors that screened entries here for accuracy and bias. This should be simple. Stick to the facts so that I, and other users, can be relatively assured of some level of quality when viewing entries.
Change "Republican" link to United_States_Republican_Party
The current "Republican" link (changed very recently from "Repuglican") should probably have a final edit to link to the the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Republican_Party page, which is a little more pertinent in that context.
I would have made the change myself but the page was locked at that point.
Meaning of "pundit"
This word has been used for decades (since before there was an Internet) to describe someone who writes about politics. The laughable etymological assertion in this article -- "the word 'pundit' is now a common key word for bloggers in the political interest. Arguably originated by Instapundit." -- should be removed unless someone can provide support or attribution for this alleged argument. JamesMLane 02:34, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)