Speaking For Me Only

I have been ridiculed and ribbed for the use of "speaking for me only" on my posts. But this little incident proves the correctness of my use.

When a mild mannered blogger like Yglesias has his rather innocuous post stir up trouble, imagine what my incendiary pieces might do?

As we all knew, logrolling is not limited to writers and Hollywood - it is a DC pasttime as well. But I do laugh at those folks who think it does not happen at their place. There may not be an official policy, but there are hierarchies and sacred cows throughout the blogosphere too.

And yes, I am speaking for me only.

< Cheney Defends Himself | Down From The Ivory Tower: Private College Applications Down >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    it always made sense to me, (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by cpinva on Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 07:18:50 AM EST
    you're making a point of indicating that you don't officially speak for the blog. similar to the disclaimer used for opinion columns in newspapers.

    I think it should not require saying (none / 0) (#2)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 07:29:14 AM EST
    but it does require saying, especially since I am rather incendiary.

    CYA - SOP. (none / 0) (#4)
    by Fabian on Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 07:54:38 AM EST
    It should be first nature to a lawyer.

    It certainly irritated me when I first started running into legal CYAs in various dealings.  ("Corporate won't let us....")  But after a while, I began to respect it but never grew to like it.


    in a perfect world............. (none / 0) (#7)
    by cpinva on Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 10:30:56 AM EST
    I think it should not require saying

    The obvious and the less so (none / 0) (#3)
    by koshembos on Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 07:40:46 AM EST
    Personally, I never think that anyones post reflects anything but their own opinion; it's not the NYT but rather a blog. So saying what you sign off with is obvious and implied anyway.

    Less obvious is the fact that although you are not  a middle of the road, partisan and going along poster, you still are quite a moderate guy with moderate opinions. Therefore, I don't really see much blood here from butchering sacred cows. My personal opinion is to see more blood. For instance, to complain about half of Obama's cabinet, i.e., Gates, Jones, Daschle, Holder, Richardson and Geithner as unfit for this administration.

    When anyone posts on a blog, it is supposed (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by DeborahNC on Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 11:18:29 AM EST
    to reflect their perspective on a given subject. How could anyone think otherwise?

    Even at the NYT, any article in opinion should be considered that author's view on the subject matter. Now, if it's in the news section, it shouldn't contain the author's opinion; yet, I've seen reporting that appeared too close to an opinion piece, with a few facts thrown in.

    FWIW, I think BTD's posts, in general, are of the politically centrist variety.


    I agree (none / 0) (#5)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 07:59:28 AM EST
    I AM the Middle.

    Never succeeded to be moderate (none / 0) (#6)
    by koshembos on Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 08:48:18 AM EST
    Wow (none / 0) (#8)
    by squeaky on Mon Dec 22, 2008 at 11:07:39 AM EST
    Your tag, so to speak, sure makes sense now..  Quite a dustup over there over a lost penny...