Matt Welch hauls Ty Webb to the woodshed. A few weeks back, Matt wrote an article for Reason magazine, in which he discussed his observations of the Nader campaign on election night 2000. Ty has twice now claimed the story is but a figment of Matt's imagination. Matt is none too happy about the accusation. Apologies? Explanations? And when we are personally involved in the subject we're discussing, what is/should be our duty to get all the facts before posting?
Is the beast dead? Probably not, but Matt Welch issues a pretty strong condemnation of the "old school" of commentary versus the new, especially the recent outbreak of "warblogs"