I do not support Gillibrand BUT to be fair, she did vote against the bailout. She deserves credit for that.

Another very good example of "BLOGGING FOR THE CANDIDATES" that I have complained about before. Why should "whatshisname" have to point out the obvious fact that the Gazette reporter/blogger overlooked. I thought this section was improving in its impartiality but this is a huge step backwards. Gazette reporters should be fair & thorough not just in the print edition but in their blogs too. We expect no less! Printing press releases almost verbatim is hardly fair & certainly not thorough.

Grant,

Your complaints about the journalistic integrity of this blog is again well off-base. What you see as blogging "for" the candidates is a basic fundamental of reporting news - publicizing a complaint of alleged wringdoing. The other fundamental is getting the other side of the story - which we would if anyone from Gillibrand's team responded to our requests for comment.

Obviously, your understanding of journalistic principles and mine seem to be quite different. With 20 years of experience in the business, I can assure you that we are doing nothing more than many other newspapers and newspaper Web sites are doing across the country.

And as the online editor for DailyGazette.com, I can ensure you that we strive for the same fair coverage on the Web site that we provide in the newspaper (hence, we equally publicize complaints by Democratic AND Republican candidates).

Oh, and by the way, should I question YOUR motives when the only time you've been critical of this blog is when we publicize complaints against Democratic candidates. Where were you when we were seemingly critical of Republican George Amedore's appearance before the Schenectady City Council or promoting endorsements of Democratic candidates Paul Tonko, Mark Blanchfield, Terry O'Neill and David Soares.

What it all boils down to is the age-old critique of the media: People on the left think the media leans to the right, while people on the right think the media leans to the left. And what that tells me is that we in the media are right where we belong, in the middle, ticking off both sides of the aisle.

I'm wondering if my idea of "impartial" is a little different (read: not as far to the left) from yours.

First, where in this blog entry does it say that the reporter attempted to get a rebuttal & was denied? It's very hard to believe that if "whatsisname" pointed it out (without being asked) that the Gillibrand campaign would not have pointed it out if they HAD been asked. Second, why would I bother complaining about the unfairness of the Amedore blog when THREE other people already had?

You may have 20 years experience in journalism but I have a great deal more than that in assessing the quality of journalists. One of the reasons that I have subscribed to the Gazette for more years than you claim to have journalistic experience is that, until the lame excuse for journalism that this particular blog purports to be started appearing, readers could unequivocally rely on the Gazette for fair and balanced reporting. Objectivity in a newspaper does not mean printing unsubstantiated smears by both left AND right. It means not printing unsubstantiated smears at all!

And I guess most of all, I object to the concept that because some trashy websites may publish bad blogs, this is an excuse for the Gazette to have one too.