Comments on: Innovative videoblogging ad goes after new audience

By: d henry

d henry — Sat, 31 Mar 2007 00:19:24 +0000

Now, why shouldn’t a company have a right to explain it’s products to people? I seemed to see a few officers who were appreciative of the protection of kevlar. And who’s not paid? Newspeople are paid. So are people who do information for companies. Why do you have to put Ms. Congdon in a category? Are you purer working for the ABC news company than for Dupont? Live and let live, okay?

By: Huh?

Huh? — Fri, 23 Mar 2007 19:29:25 +0000

What exactly is the point? I can’t figure our why DuPont would bother do do this. Will thiskind of promotional video get more cops to buy their product? I don’t get it as a business decision.

By: MSM

MSM — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 19:28:09 +0000

Herein, a cautionary tale of willful self-destruction.

AmandaCongdon.com Dec. 14, 2006: “You are witnessing 100% of my authentic voice.”

AmandaCongdon.com March 20, 2007: “Bring on the endorsements!”

Amanda, you can muster all the self-righteous jargon you like, about “new paradigms” and “infotainmercials” and “acts of journalism” and the rest. The bottom line is, you sold your voice to the highest bidder. You see nothing wrong with doing it, and would do it again “in a heartbeat.” In the words of George Bernard Shaw, “We’ve already established what you are, ma’am. Now we’re just haggling over the price.”

You write “I think what they [DuPont] contribute to the world outweighs the damage they’ve done in the past.” Is that your ABC NEWS voice speaking, or your DuPont voice? And when you interview Barack Obama, or report on issues such as the environment (as ABC NEWS has said publicly it would like you to do) … will those be “acts of journalism,” or part of the DuPont “act” again?

Amanda, you can no more carve your voice into “acts of journalism” and “acting” for DuPont than an accountant can separate “acts of accounting” from “acts of manipulation.”

You are what you are. ABC NEWS will soon be forced by its own journalists, who know the difference between a reporter and a shill, to acknowedge the reality as well. And so, just a few months after promising the world “100% of my authentic voice,” it will be gone.

It is a real pity for you and your viewers that you do not recognize what you have done to yourself.

By: Bryan Murley

Bryan Murley — Thu, 22 Mar 2007 00:02:29 +0000

“And under the ‘blogger’ title, which is what I am, hello? I am not subject to the ‘rules’ traditional journalists have to follow.”

I think Congdon is an entertainer, and should be thought of as one. She’s more Tina Fey of Weekend Update than Katie Couric. But the snark really does nothing to quell the “bloggers vs. journalists” war.

By: thekevlarchannel

thekevlarchannel — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 23:32:07 +0000

And the quest for credibility for the blogger community takes another hit. Thanks for nothing, Amanda…

By: thephoenixchannel

thephoenixchannel — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 22:37:29 +0000

those puppies are kevlar?

By: Photogonfire

Photogonfire — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 22:28:25 +0000

As much as I try to find something to like about Amanda, I can’t come up with a thing… Don’t get me wrong, I like eye candy as much as the next red-blooded American man but, short of that, her popularity is a mystery to me.

By: G Man

G Man — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 20:19:35 +0000

I like the comments left at the Radar article regarding Amanda’s assets. Just goes to show - sex sells.

By: Safran

Safran — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 20:08:30 +0000

You lost me at “We didn’t get paid.”