From this week's on-line discussion with Howard Kurtz:

... This episode, for the umpteenth time, raised serious questions about the credibility of commenters such as Michelle Malkin and Powerline. Do you agree that credibility is an issue with these commenters, and will that affect whether or not you will continue to highlight their work in your column?
...

Howard Kurtz: I will leave it to my readers to decide which bloggers have credibility and which do not.

Kinda raises some questions, don't it?

Like, what then is the value of a Media Notes column? If I want to see what's going on on the internets, I can just look at memeorandum.com.

But Kurtz is an experienced reporter. He has experience and judgement with which to evaluate the reporting, the opining, and the wanking. He sometimes comments on the excerpts he presents, sometimes he doesn't.

Here he is saying that he does not bring his judgement to bear on a writer's credibility. And that brings me back to, what is the value of his column?

Kurtz, whether he wants to admit or not, is lending his credibility to wankers like Malkin and PowerTools when he presents their material.

Pretty irresponsible, especially in light of this episode.