kokonutz

I think Ben would be a terrific character witness for United. He could tell the jury about how United sent him a 20th voucher for a broken overhead light and he was able to turn that single voucher into thousands and thousands of dollars. A real feel-good bootstrap story if I've ever heard one! @:-)

Astrophsx

Correct me if I'm wrong here... about 6-7 years ago the same bloggers who are writing about the United incident today were the ones writing stories about how wonderful the voluntary bumps were and how they went out of their way to book them with no real intention to take the flight?

Then you have Ben (who I believe got his start doing that as well) who said in RS he was banned from United for taking advantage of how gracious United support team was by looking for any minor detail to complain about to get compensation.

Adam1222

that's not what Ben was banned for.

Astrophsx

I think everyone here is probably aware of why he was really banned.

JonNYC

And, hopefully, how little it has to do with the subject.

84fiero

Even more so since it was Nick, not Ben, who penned that particular post. Sure, Ben owns the website, but it was Nick's characterization of the UA incident that was posted.

Adam1222

then why did you say another reason and say "correct me if I'm wrong"??

As for the publisher/owner vs the individual author, I don't think it's wrong to impute a bias/appearance of bias to an entire blog, particularly where the blog has one public face, and it is a reasonable assumption that Ben has all editorial control. (You might think boarding area does, but BA bloggers have repeatedly posted otherwise.)

I think this is all a matter of degree. Would you think Ben had a duty to disclose his experience if he was writing an article calling United a thug for shutting down a Mileage Plus account ? If one of his other writers did? What if it were a more general story and included the line "United manipulates the terms of contracts with customers to deny them rights and benefits"? "United acts arbitrarily in how it treats customers"? "United doesn't care about the rights of its customers."

I'd hope we all agree there's a line somewhere, but are just disagreeing on where that line is drawn. In the normal world, a writer/publishers integrity is so important that you don't go close to that line -- a similar story would have been (1) tempered down in language, (2) included a disclosure of prior history, and/or (3) not published. It's not like no one else was covering this "Story."

For me, this is more evidence that no one at OMAAT thinks about this or other similar issues.

gpapadop

Where is Ford? Did TPG hire him too?

kokonutz

The business model of the blogosphere is clicks and clicks and CC conversions. Standards, ethics and even common sense are often anathema to that model. It's like asking a used car salesman to point out the flaws of a car he's selling.

jspira

That is something reputable journalists and publications are concerned with but therein lies the difference between bloggers and journalists, in broad stroke.

Adam1222

I guess I don't think that needs to be the case, and think as consumers of blogs we shouldn't accept that as given. Bloggers won't be accountable if no one holds them accountable.

jspira

You are right. It doesn't. But absent the rigorous editorial structure that exists in publications and generally not in blogs, there's no one at the helm who looks out for such issues.

Adam1222

Which I guess is the point of many of the posts in this thread. Self-policing by Ben, or by Boarding Area, would be great, but unless consumers, advertisers, or government regulators incentivize them to do so, they will not.

This is also why I think the moralizing re: United is hypocritical; OMAAT is holding United to a moral/ethical/consumer-protection standard it does not apply to itself.

jspira

To be fair, there are some newspapers (aka scandal sheets) that will print anything much in the manner of a blog.

This is the reason that the FTC requires disclosures by bloggers (but not by journalists) for gifts and endorsements by the way. The editorial structure in a publication is presumed to ensure the lack of a conflict of interest (which is not foolproof, I should add, but it generally works).

Adam1222

I think you mean the FTC, not the FCC. Print media and blogs are subject to the same disclosure/unfair trade practices laws. (Have you ever seen those "ADVERTISEMENT NOT EDITORIAL CONTENT" lines at the top or bottoms of certain pages of magazines/newspapers?) I've pointed out before that most of the Boarding Area blogs actually do not comply with the FTC guidance on disclosures.