Comments on: My Romenesko verdict: no harm, no foul Tue, 10 Feb 2015 19:54:39 +0000 hourly 1 By: Koretzky Sat, 12 Nov 2011 17:23:33 +0000 This is the most reasoned and reasonable analysis of the Romenesko War I’ve read so far – and I have little enough of a life to have read them all.

Three observations…

1. Journalists who lament a lack of subtlety and spelling when readers comment on their stories don’t possess much when commenting themselves. Just from the NPR account: “Oh my, he didn’t quote his sources. Perhaps Guantanemo Bay and waterboarding are an appropriate penalty. Heck, let’s shoot for the electric chair.”

2. The argument that journalists have rushed to Romenesko’s defense out of greed for the links is either silly or sad. Romenesko has linked to my own journalistic endeavors exactly five times. The referral traffic was nice, but not as significant as tweets from college kids or from the amusingly juvenile

3. You realize, of course, this is just the sort of controversy that drives traffic to the Poynter site and to Romenesko’s new project. A serious media conspiracy theorist would insist the two plotted this out, since Romenesko was set to quietly retire in a few weeks. And online, silence=death.

By: AlanStamm Sat, 12 Nov 2011 16:28:10 +0000 Well-hammered squarely on the head, Jack.

Intent: Pure. Results: Benign. Niff-naw: “An answer in search of a problem,” as David Carr says.

And after two days of scanning this topic’s many threads — what seems like each fiber of every stitch on the baseball — I come across this delightfully original phrase: “the Romenesko gestalt.”