Apparently, Thomas Lipscomb can’t read:
The inanity of the reporting continued in Kurtz’s noting of an American Spectator staffer, Jeff Tabin, who wrote Kurtz “I’ve googled in vain for evidence of [a] 9mm cartridge that features ‘a square back.'”
Great!… The New Republic can’t fact-check, The Weekly Standard can flounce indignantly, but it doesn’t do any fact-checking either, and now The American Spectator employs a staffer who likes to get his name in the papers who thinks fact-checking in looking something up on Google.
“Jeff” Tabin? (I do have a cousin named Geoff, but as far as I know he has no connection to AmSpec.) Someone from AmSpec “wrote to Kurtz?” No. Kurtz was quoting a blog post. Had Lipscomb bothered to read that post, he’d note that the next line was a plea to readers to help me out. To suggest that I think “fact-checking in [sic] looking something up on Google” is a borderline-slanderous charge from someone who doesn’t seem to understand why blogging is a useful tool for reports.
As anyone who’s read this blog knows, for the past few days I’ve been exchanging emails with experts and attempting to get people from TNR on the phone. My blogging (and Michael Goldfarb’s at the Standard) is part of the real-time reporting process; posting a public plea for help is more efficient than trying to track down the right people to ask on my own. Apparently, Lipscomb is disturbed that reporting can be done out in the open in the age of the 24/7 internet. That’s his problem, not mine. And since Lipscomb manages to get three facts wrong in the space of a few sentences, he can spare me the J-school lecture.