Georgie Anne Geyer has an opinion piece on Yahoo News where she appears to blame blogs for the Iraq War.
Think for a moment of what might have happened had we had better (really, any) coverage of Afghanistan during the 1990s, when the Taliban and
Osama bin Laden were cooking up a second attack after the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center. Could we then have been so amazed by 9/11? Wasn't it criminally irresponsible to be so amazed?
Think a little further. If more Americans had had a comprehensive view of the world -- the kind that is irrevocably blurred by the 80,000 new blogging sites launched every week -- it would have been barely possible for the 30 people who in essence started the Iraq war to have acted without the accord of the American people.
A lot of people see it the other way around. The mainstream media was not providing enough coverage of international news. They were also not publishing enough information about Iraq's weapons and the possibility that an invasion could lead to a civil war during the time period the Bush Administration was pushing for the Iraq War. Blog readership was not even very high three years ago and at the time there were blogs both for and against the war. Blogs are not to blame. (Via No Silence Here -> Romenesko)
