Media coverage: What? Credibility? Who gives a DAMN?

In the Washington Post's Media Notes "Media and Punishment" Howard Kurtz writes about Poynter's Romenesko's ability to expose faux reporters in a google-swoop, talks about Mitch Albom's faking it, and other journalistic lies. And so, if you believe what you read in the papers as Will Rogers had, you are a fool. Of course, a story with this theme just has to lead to Jeff Gannon. Citizen Kurtz points out that Gannon feels that he was anointed by GOD to work in the White House Briefing room. At least that what our flavor-of-the-month tells next months Vanity Fair.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/04/11/LI2005041100587.html

As for building true credibilty based on talent and intelligence, and to be taken seriously by [your] audience, if you are the few who have been reading my web log, you know I have said--advised!--- that he has a long uphill battle. Right now, he has as much chance of being taken seriously as our gal Paris Hilton [a must-read!] but, let me ask you -with all of this familiarity, this high - viz - ability, is credility necessary?

"Paris Hilton: Ready to get more Serious." = http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050502/ENTERTAINMENT/505020413/1005/ENTERTAINMENT