We’ve discussed the WorldNetDaily article where Jerome Corsi smears a forum operator that goes under the name of Foggy. We’ve discussed the merits of a libel suit against WND. We’ve discussed why the WND article isn’t right. But let me present a different question: what possible reason could Corsi and WorldNetDaily have to publish such an article in the first place?
I can understand why Corsi smears Barack Obama. Obama has power. Obama’s programs and policies have an impact on the country. Obama is news.
Foggy just runs a forum. Alexa.com ranks Fogbow as number #205,205 among web sites. Compare that to The Huffington Post at #105 and even WorldNetDaily at around #2,878. Foggy’s minor lawyering troubles in California were a decade ago — hardly news today, and probably not even local news in California back then.
So why write an article to smear Foggy?
Foggy comments on Internet forums that relate to Barack Obama’s eligibility. How is that news? Many of my readers do that and the number of people who comment on the Internet every day probably runs in the hundreds of millions (there are an estimated 1.87 billion Internet users).
Foggy wrote a letter to a US attorney about Orly Taitz. He may have handled a fake Kenyan birth certificate. There’s no evidence that either of them had an impact on WND readers. WorldNetDaily even had some news to report debunking that fake certificate which Foggy did not create. And even if Foggy had something to do with getting the fake Kenyan birth certificate to Taitz, what does his California bar status have to do with anything except as an attempt to smear Foggy’s reputation?
This is all nothing stuff. Bloggers are not news.
So why did Jerome Corsi representing what claims to be a major news organization chose to pick on an obscure web site operator who 99.99999% of the world has never heard of (up until now)? I don’t have a clue.