In my mind, and this is just my personal opinion, the key here -- just as with Virginia campaign finance laws -- is full disclosure. In short, if a blogger is in an ongoing, paying relationship with a particular politician, he or she should disclose it so that his or her readers can judge the blogger's writings accordingly. That's not the law, or even part of any (non-existent) "blogger code of ethics," it's simply a matter of personal ethics.
For instance, since August 2007, I have been paid by Judy Feder as a netroots consultant to her campaign. In early 2007, the Feder campaign had approached me to run a blog for them (Farewell Frank), and I agreed. In doing so, I have clearly disclosed this relationship and allowed my readers to calibrate their reaction to my writings on that subject accordingly.
Also, for the past 3 months I've been a paid consultant to Jon Bowerbank, the only (currently) declared Democratic candidate for Lieutenant Governor. Back in the spring, Jon's people had approached me to work as his netroots coordinator, and again I agreed. Since then, I have disclosed this relationship on numerous occasions, simply because I think this is the right thing to do. Eric -- another RK front pager -- has done the same with his own Bowerbank consulting employment.
One more I should mention, because I have been criticized because of it. In early January 2008, I received a one-time, $500 payment from the Byrne campaign, a month after I had endorsed her (because I believed she was the strongest progressive in the race, and also out of loyalty and friendship for what she'd done to help Jim Webb in 2006), for help in Leslie's raffle of tickets to the Daily Show. Besides that, I never received a penny from the Byrne campaign, in exchange for hundreds of hours of work on her behalf. Also, when I endorsed Leslie, I had no inkling that I'd ever receive a penny from her; that was completely irrelevant to my decision to endorse her.
More broadly, the issue here is whether bloggers should be able to earn a living in politics. In my view, the answer to that question is an unequivocal "yes," as long as the bloggers fully disclose to their readers what they are doing. Of course, campaign expenditures -- including payments to bloggers - are also reported to the FEC and the Virginia State Board of Elections. Still, my personal ethical code say that I should go above and beyond that, letting my readers know that I am taking money from a candidate so that they can judge my writings on that candidate accordingly. I would also point out that many people are paid by candidates in various capacities to speak for them, to run their campaigns, to conduct their research, etc.
Why would this strange class of humans known as "bloggers" be treated differently than any other people who work in politics? I don't have a great answer to that question, except that "bloggers" are valued in large part for their "authenticity" and perceived independence. And certainly, being paid by a campaign can create the appearance of inauthenticity or lack of independence. Again, however, I believe that full disclosure allows the reader to make his or her own decision regarding what value to place on the blogger's writings.
Finally, here's a list of RK "front pagers" who - to my knowledge - are currently receiving money from political candidates.
Myself: I receive money from Judy Feder to run the Farewell Frank blog. I also am paid by Jon Bowerbank as his netroots coordinator.
Eric: Is a paid consultant to Jon Bowerbank.
Brian Patton: Is a paid consultant to Jon Bowerbank.
At the moment, that's all I'm aware of. I'm sure that others have received money from political candidates in the past (e.g., Josh for his work on the Webb campaign from July to December 2006). I hope that helps clear things up.
P.S. One more point about bloggers; they are a hybrid - to wildly varying degrees, depending on the blogger - of political activist, writer, quasi-journalist, and independent (to varying degrees) observer/commentator. Given that there are tens of millions of bloggers out there, covering subjects ranging from cats to cars to cooking to campaigns, it's almost impossible to generalize. A few bloggers no doubt make a living off of blogging (mainly through advertising on their sites), but the VAST majority make little or nothing. Let's put it this way: there aren't a lot of blogs out there that get 1 million visits per day as Daily Kos does, enabling it to charge shweeet advertising rates. The vast majority of sites, including this one, make a few bucks - or maybe, if they're lucky like we are, a few hundred bucks - a month off of advertising. Besides that, the bloggers have to either keep their regular day jobs, try their hand in the world of political consulting, or win the lottery. Of course, given the odds of winning the lottery...
Part of the controversy comes from the very fluid role of bloggers in politics. On the one hand, we're not mainstream media journalists, for whom any consulting - paid or volunteer - with a candidate would be verboten. Since their role is to report the news as factually, objectively, and fairly (at least in theory) as possible, it would be wildly inappropriate for them to accept money for professional consulting on a political campaign.
Since some blogs were started because of dissatisfaction with the biases of some newspapers, readers could have a perception that bloggers should be more objective than newspaper reporters.
But bloggers are not reporters. They are not journalists. So, they don't have an obligation to remain non-partisan, objective and above the fray. What they are obligated to do, of course, is be truthful. It is never all right to lie, distort, or otherwise play with facts.
But choosing what to report, advocating on behalf of your policy position, or supporting one candidate over another are all acceptable practices for bloggers.
For the most part, bloggers who also work as consultants are working for candidates they believe in. They aren't altering their opinions for money; they are getting paid for advancing causes or candidates they would support in any case.
Lowell, you especially have a paper trail (or an e-trail) of supporting progressive causes and candidates whether you've been a paid consultant or not. Readers can judge you, at this point, on your consistency.
I have not found any discrepancies between who you are supporting this year and who you supported last year. I have not seen an inconsistency between the opinions you are expressing now and those you expressed in the past. So, I would say that readers know what to expect and can judge for themselves when they read your work.
Once any blogger has posted for a couple of years, it would be easy to see if they are consistent or selling out to the highest bidder. Just follow the trail of their writings.
I think the payments have been fairly and regularly disclosed here on RK -- And I'm not questioning anyone's ethics -- but the efficacy of these disclosures is not clear to me. What happens next year when RK gets a whole new crop of readers who have not read this post? Should Lowell or Eric have to disclose a potential conflict in every post on Judy Feder or Jon Bowerbank? That seems pretty onerous.
And then there is the issue of whether RK, or any blog for that matter, can hold itself out as a true "voice of progressive Virginia when it accepts money from a candidate, even when that paying candidate's positions and values are consistent with Progressive values. After all, what if another progressive Democrat decides to run for LG against Jon Bowerbank. I would not expect diaries on behalf of that candidate to see the same front page exposure here at RK as Lowell's and Eric's diaries get. That is fine -- I've said repeatedly, it is their blog and they can do with it as they wish -- but it may not really be serving the interests of Progressive values.
I don't have an answer, and as I say, I am no ethics Czar. And I just finished a really long drive with two kids, so maybe I'm a bit ornery. And I have no problem whatsoever with anything that has gone on here at RK, but rightly or wrongly, I just don't think this issue is going to go away so easily.
The less clear cut area is message coordination with a campaign (e.g. where a blogger receives and reprints talking points from a campaign, but the blogger doesn't receive money).
In cases where talking points are reprinted verbatim I think it would be above board to disclose that the message is being generated from somewhere outside of the bloggers own mind (e.g. simply reprinting a press release and indicating as much).
In cases where a blogger develops a story idea floated to it by a campaign and where the blogger does some independent research I see the work as being closer to reporting (serving a public interest function), because the blogger is exercising a degree of independence and not relying simply on the say-so of one outside source.
The beauty of blogs is that they can serve both functions -- e.g. a public interest function where a degree of independence is maintained -- and outright advocacy where a blogger functions as a less autonomous campaign operative.
Transparency is key. So long as these two areas are made clear a blog should be able to maintain its credibility in the eyes of its readership. On balance RK has done a very good job striking this balance.
I do get free books on education in the hopes I will write about them. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. If I don't ask to write about the book, there are no promises.
Nowadays I periodically get invited to business ventures, like, would I like to host a series of videos of students talking about politics, filmed by a professional videographer? My reward is supposed to be the high visibility it is supposed to give me. I think I'll pass on that.
My real recompense is when my words have an effect on someone, perhaps motivating them to do something. Or they thank me, on or off line, for what I have said.
If I am supporting someone, I think I make that clear. If I am volunteering beyond what I write, I will say that as well. If I have a personal relationship, positive or negative, I also disclose that.
For me blogging is its own reward.
Peace.