Not so cool with it unless it’s an ad or disclosed, but Markos disclosed so I’m unclear on what the controversy is.
I think it’s a bit naive to think that reporters and bloggers aren’t the targets of attempted influence through different means. Disclosure of money for services should be the standard and I have little doubt that when campaigns advertise they want to get good coverage. As I’ve long said, that is a relatively good bet assuming I agree with you. The ad reminds me of your campaign and so I tend to post on it more often. If I don’t agree with you that may have the oppositive effect of what you desire.
I know campaigns have tried to influence me–they say so. 😉
I’ve never taken money, though I have had drinks paid for by campaigns. I like to think of it as research. I’m not going to disclose that every time it happens. Of course, I’ve never been offered money except for ads so that makes that easy.
The controversy is a manufactured one, done up by Republican creeps who seek any opportunity to turn attention away from their own behavior.
The controversy, as far as I care at this point, actually falls on a different line:
Markos Moulitsas Zuniga: http://www.dailykos.net/archives/002972.html
“I will also not discuss any of my other clients, including their identities (I have non-disclose agreements to which I must adhere).”
Chris Suellentrop: http://slate.msn.com/id/2112314/
“Here’s what Moulitsas wrote about payola pundit Armstrong Williams’ assertion that “There are others” on the government dole: “Until names are named, we can assume every conservative pundit is on the White House’s payola rolls.” That’s questionable logic, but let’s take Moulitsas up on his challenge: Until names are named, we can assume every Daily Kos candidate this past election wrote him a check for his consulting work.”
Sure, I consider the above quote to be smarmy. I considered Markos’ Armstrong quote to be nearly as bad. In reality, I expect that each wrote their quotes recognizing that they were trolling, instead of offering sound logic.
All Markos has to do to bury this is to deny that he worked for (or took money from) any of the Markos 12. Unfortunately, he has yet to deny it.
If / when he does, I will believe him, and consider this a dead controversy.
Craig
And now, Markos has denied it:
“There’s been questions as to whether I was paid by any of the campaigns I endorsed in the ineptly named Kos Dozen. The answers is no. Now, I didn’t feel a need to disclose it because quite frankly, I don’t think my every financial move is any of anybody’s business unless I write about the topic.”