The Weekly Standard tracks the rise of the Swift Boat Veterans story in the media and gives credit where credit is due:

There are many reasons why the mainstream media don’t like the Swift boat story, but chief among them is that they’ve been strong-armed into covering it by the “new” media: talk-radio, cable television, and Internet blogs….

The numbers are fairly striking: Before August 19, the New York Times and Washington Post had each mentioned Swift Boat Veterans for Truth just 8 times; the Los Angeles Times 7 times; the Boston Globe 4 times. The broadcast networks did far less. According to the indefatigable Media Research Center, before Kerry went public, ABC, CBS, and NBC together had done a total of 9 stories on the Swifties. For comparison, as of August 19 these networks had done 75 stories on the accusation that Bush had been AWOL from the National Guard.

After Kerry, the deluge. On August 24, the Washington Post ran three op-eds and an editorial on the Swifties; other papers expanded their coverage as well. But, curiously, they didn’t try to play catch-up with the new media in ascertaining the veracity of the Swifties’ claims. Instead, they pursued (or rather, repeated) the charge Kerry made: that Bush was behind Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. It was a touch surreal–as it would have been if Democratic national chairman Terry McAuliffe’s criticism of Bush’s National Guard record had prompted the media to investigate Terry McAuliffe.

The article correctly notes that this would never have gotten off the ground without cable television, but it’s nice to see hard-working bloggers get some credit for chasing down the truth.

Congrats to Kerry Haters for getting a mention. A number of the blogging heavies got press, including Hugh Hewitt, Glenn Reynolds, JustOneMinute, The Belmont Club and Powerline.

John Hinderaker, one of the bloggers behind Powerline, summed up the mood of the blogosphere by comparing journalism with brain surgery: “A bunch of amateurs, no matter how smart and enthusiastic, could never outperform professional neurosurgeons, because they lack the specialized training and experience necessary for that field,” he said. “But what qualifications, exactly, does it take to be a journalist? What can they do that we can’t? Nothing.”

This is an interesting observation on a subject near and dear to my heart. One of the reasons I started blogging was to see if I could do it. Not blog — anybody can let thoughts flow in great Faulknerian style, yet make little sound nor fury in the grand scheme of things. I wanted to know if I could write well. I have since come to the conclusion I could, had I taken journalism in school and if I had the resources that a professional writer has (especially research avenues) I believe that I could make a name for myself. Alas, for the road not taken.