Hi, well, there's something that didn't get across during my interview with Matt Smith. Unlike Matt's comparison to a single sponsor structure akin to early Television, the actual project involves a company that previously had mostly focused on product reviews of tech gadgets and toys broadening their scope to include a series of branded-blogs.

The contract itself does allow for certain material to be removed from the site by the publisher, but these circumstances are rather narrowly tailored and comprise issues concerning defamation, copyright material, and illegal speech. While I'd prefer not to be governed by any such limitations, I feel that these sorts of reservations are part and parcel for any business doing business in today's legalistic society.

I don't know. I don't think this is really a story, although I don't mind the fact that the Weekly featured it, in order to bring advertisement to Wolf's new job. It is seriously great that he got a journalism job. I read that more people with journalism degrees become private investigators than paid journalists, because there are so few jobs. Josh Wolf has it even worse, in a way, because he can't escape all the junk written on the internet during the past year. Much more minor items coming up in a google search could hurt normal people applying for normal jobs. The future prospects of paid journalism look even more dismal as dozens are being laid off from all the major newspapers due to car/apartment ads moving onto craigslist etc.

Congratulations on your job.

Ah, c'mon, Matt. You mean, the rather disgusting journalistic octopus corporation that pays you and writes your headlines doesn't have any say in your content? Dream on, dude, and get over the sanctimony, not to mention the martyr-envy.

this is the stupidest video i've seen in a while - and not Josh's comments, but the nonsense this other dude is spouting. i'm supposed to believe an editor censoring someone's work is not, in fact, censorship - it's a 'professional relationship' of some sort or something or other, but it's definitely not 'corporate censorship'.

ho-kay.

that's not even stupid. that's just pid.

The problem here is lack of transparency. Readers, viewers and listeners of journalistic material should be able to know who is paying the bills for that material, especially if it is not traditionally independent journalism. But Josh Wolf says, "I can't identify being part of the company, and yet they are economically helping sustain the blog, so that creates a very strange relationship between the blogger and the -- not parent company, because they're not affilated. I don't know what the legal status of that is." Well, I don't know what he means by saying a parent company is not affiliated. His readers deserve clarification and transparency.

campers,

Welcome to the online food-fight business, Matt. I'd stand on a drop cloth and not wear the suit and tie. Goggles might be a good idea too.

So, Adam Werbach (youngest head of Sierra Club, now PUC commissioner - appointed by Acting-Mayor Daly) ... Adam went to work for Wal-Mart and seems clueless that he's part of a n insincere Green Wash.

And, Josh will work for Google (?) who agreed to remove the word 'democracy' from their Chinese dictionary for money.

That does it! Anyone got Warren Hellman's number? I want to do commercials for Wells Fargo.

h.

Huh? This sounds like the situation that exists at any mainstream media operation. He writes, but management has the right to not print it. Anyone who's worked in the MSM recognizes this business template.

That doesn't make Wolf a sell-out, although it does put him in the MSM though, with all the baggage that entails. Citizen journalists operate with more journalistic freedom, but corporate journalists have more resources.

It's a trade off. Let's hope he brings some of the positive values of citizen journalism into the mainstream.

And post author Matt Smith is so jealous of Wolf's "martyr" status, it's dripping off my monitor and onto my keyboard.

No, this is very different from, say, a newspaper. The equivalent would be someone SPONSORING the column (say, Toyota) having editorial control.

Al: While I'll give you the fact that my statement about the relationship to the publisher and my blog is rather cloudy and elusive, this is because what I've heard from them is also rather confusing. Stating that I'm confused about this matter *is* transparency.

As I see it, it comes down to this - the company hosting the blog wants to disassociate itself from the views expressed by their bloggers and so there is a whole set of legal language about how I'm not an employee of the company, and my writing in no way represents the company's position.

And BobH - while this is the way that Matt Smith makes it appear in his article, nothing can be further from the truth. Media Sphere will be part of a new blogging network being put together by a tech news outlet.

ironic that this guy spent the last few years blasting anything corporate or government on his blog and now can justify working for one of the biggest corporations out there. somewhat hypocritical I think but I imagine there weren't too many legitimate journalism job offers considering his credentials or past work.

hmmm. what would happen if matt smith wrote something that New Times didn't like?

they'd refuse to publish it, that's what.

gotta love how people were trashing josh for not being a 'real' journalist. now that he's accepted your criteria for credibility, he's a sell-out, eh?

just another case of bash-the-anarchist-cuz-ya-cant-win-a-damn-argument-with-one.

Roger, as Josh said, he isn't working for Google or anyplace that is "one of the biggest corporations out there."

It is you who would flunk Journalism 101.

SF WEEKLY JOURNALISM SCANDAL – MATT SMITH’S FALSE & INACCURATE NEWS REPORTING

It appears that SF Weekly reporter, Matt Smith, is guilty of a journalism scandal - unfair and inaccurate reporting of a news event – by making substantial reporting and researching errors with the results leading to libelous or defamatory statements. Perhaps Matt Smith’s media scandal was a deliberate attempt to promote himself or a means to further a political goal.

According to Wikipedia, Journalism scandals are high-profile incidents or acts, whether intentional or accidental, that run contrary to the generally accepted ethics and standards of journalism, or otherwise violate the 'ideal' mission of journalism: to report news events and issues accurately and fairly.

SF Newspaper, Beyond Chron reported on Smith’s journalistic reporting and research errors …

“It is no secret that the SF Weekly’s Matt Smith has trouble getting his facts straight …”

Smith was so excited to see a total lobbying amount of $4.8 million on the Clinic’s most recent 990 form that he ignored the fact that this was the maximum amount the group was authorized to spend.

“There is a line item just below that number that asks for the “Total lobbying expenditures.” Had Smith learned to read more carefully, he would have noted that this amount totaled $728.00.

In other words, Smith’s total – adopted without question by a sitting Supervisor – was wrong by over $4 million.

And just to show that Smith’s error may be based more on malice than ineptitude, there is another line that asks about “Grassroots lobbying expenditures.” That amount also totaled $728.00.

And Smith ignored the title of the key section, which reads "Lobbying ceiling amount." To most people, "ceiling" meets the top amount that can be spent, not the actual expenditure.”

Read complete article @ http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=5069