Continuing coverage of Nick Coleman’s print temper tantrum:

Powerline called Coleman’s editor to ask that the numerous factual inaccuracies in the column be corrected (such as Powerline being paid for their work).:

Among other things, the editor advised me that Coleman’s attack on us involved no reporting, and that the column’s factual misrepresentations were to be read in that light. Moreover, certain of the misrepresentations were to be construed as sarcasm rather than taken at face value.

“Coleman’s attack involved no reporting?” That goes without saying.

Finally, according to the editor, Coleman’s false assertion that he didn’t know and we didn’t say whether we might be on the take from some campaign, political party or anonymous benefactor, appeared to violate no Star Tribune standard. In his meeting with Coleman after my discussion with the editor yesterday morning, Coleman had told the editor that he “assumed” we received a stipend from the Claremont Institute. (Wrong. As we expressly stated here in response to Coleman’s slander earlier this month, “we are not paid by anyone” for our work on the site. What part of “not” doesn’t Coleman understand?)

That’s why God invented the telephone. Speaking as a reporter, if I’m not sure about something, I call and ask. If I can’t confirm it, it doesn’t go in print. End of story. “Assume” does not cut it in my business. End of discussion.

There must be something in the water at journalism school. Didn’t we hear this kind of crap from CBS?! Since when did the onus of being accurate fall on the sources rather than the journalist? And the Strib wonders why the blogosphere came out of the primoridal ooze?

I asked the editor what standards Coleman’s column was subject to at the Star Tribune. He said he didn’t know; he would have to research the answer to that question and get back to me. But they do have standards, which is of course a relief!

Coleman’s boss has to check what standards the employees are held to. What a place to work. And that doesn’t mean spit. CBS has an ethics manual. Rules mean nothing when they exist for the sole purpose of being broken at a whim.

Remember when Jayson Blair was fired from The New York Times and editors asked wronged people why they never called the Times to complain? The answer they got was, “what good would it do?” Some expert called it a scathing indictment of the American media. Case in point here.

Powerline and others are wondering what standards Strib columnists are held to. Coleman’s column answered that one for me right off the bat.

Other interesting Coleman items:

Also worth a look, the Iowa Hawk found a rough draft of Coleman’s column that is more like Coleman than the real deal.

Chris Muir’s latest “Day by Day” blog cartoon cuts a whiny columnist screaming for relevance down to size a few notches.