So? Or, should I say, “So what.”

Clooney would rather have the exposure, than not having it. People saying good or bad or authorized or unauthorized things about him or other famous people, are par for their respective courses. It happens all to them the time. One of the prices of fame. Trust me, Clooney didn’t loose an ounce of sleep over it. Are you actually naive enough to think Clooney would give a damn?

I guess you shouldnt advance to ‘web 2.0′ unless you’ve first taken the course ‘ethics 101′.

– qcontent

It is a big deal precisely because Clooney did NOT choose. Hello?! Anybody home?

Yet, the truth of this blogging adventure is the opinions and facts can get filtered through the distribution system of blog sites.

She is no better than the New York Times. She made up an article and pasted George Clooney’s name to it. At least she should claim editing credit and credit the original interviews. Don’t the original sources have to be credited as well?

With all the Huffington Post blogs on Bush/Cheney lies, she hasn’t learned a thing. Or maybe she did learn from the Master Rove.

JJ: Maybe standards for bloggers was a good idea after all. Are you keeping your affiliation?

Even by those low standards, however, faking Clooney’s authorship of a blog post is just irredeemably trashy and sad. Are we this desperate to see celebrities’ names on something? It’s like something Tina Brown would have done had she ever been given a blog (PLEASE – nobody give her a blog…).

Not surprised one bit. Agree with everything Jeff says–you don’t get smarter when you get famous, a famous person gets you noticed and by proxy more popular, there is handy dandy thing called a “link”

But what really gets me is Arrianna’s natural tendency to step into something and proclaim herself “leader and expert”, meanwhile every other post of hers is whining about some media types arcane mistake.

Like I said above, Clooney’s people were okay-ing the “future participation” of a blog post, and arrogant Arrianna did it her way.

Wonder how many Puff Hosters come out of the closet on Ari now?

http://www.gradethenews.org/2006/copying.htm

It’s exactly what Huffington did, and it appears that it happens in journalistic outfits with some regularity.

I think the Clooney article fakery is really low, and that Huffington will lose readers. She’s already lost credibility. Rightly so. And this other story I linked to helps demonstrated why people don’t trust journalistic outfits either.

That’s a bit odd in my book

Huffington is against the war, and she knows Clooney is against the war, so she saw no problem in putting together a bunch of George’s statements to issue to the website’s readers, and didn’t think Clooney would have any objections, either. It just shows Arianna’s lack of respect for her perceived lessers (basically everyone who’s not famous), but considering she was a staunch conservative Republican a decade ago and only switched to the Democrats because she discovered she coldn’t become the GOP’s Hillary Clinton by using Michael’s political career and then his divorce settlement money, an opportunistic stunt like this using Clooney’s name shouldn’t be any surprise.

Just admit you made a mistake AH and move on.
Oh, I forgot. this creates buzz. nevermind.

What Ms. Huffington has done is akin to writing an “exclusive” news story by stringing together quotes from previously published news stories. It’s unethical.

The fact that Mr. Clooney or his publicist did or did not give permission to use his words is not the point. The point is that his words were packaged as a blog written by Mr. Clooney. It was not written by him. That’s deception, plain and simple.

Shame on you Ms. Huffington for lowering your ethical standards and painting all bloggers with that brush.

Along with “wal-mart pr bloggers,” this one is the second recent blow to reputation of the entire blogosphere. Hopefully, it won’t become a regular news that blogs aren’t as trustworthy as they are deemed to be.