Howard Kurtz is kinda the go-to guy when it comes to media criticism.

He is good on TV, engaging in social media and a sharp thinker and writer.

And he's everywhere.

Well, he was everywhere. Mostly seen on CNN's "Reliable Sources," he won't be read anymore at the Daily Beast (and Newsweek) as he was fired after a poorly written commentary on the Jason Collins coming out story that accused the NBA veteran of not disclosing he had been engaged. Collins did address that, not enough for Kurtz to notice.

But the commentary may not have been why he was fired. The criticized commentary spurned a look into Kurtz's other jobs, including writing and promoting a small web site, the Daily Download. Does he like their work, or is he an owner? 

Small issues for most, but big for him. I enjoy listening to and reading his work, but when your job is to criticize, well, it's like painting a target on your own back, especially if you don't disclose your own relationships.

It's an interesting story within the business.

They do great work at Sports Illustrated but today's coup of landing the first major sport athlete to come out as gay while playing is major, first for being a first and second for not being leaked or scooped.

It's a shame the value of getting the story out first as the real success is in finding and telling the story well, which Sports Illustrated appears to have done. But Deadspin notes, based on accounts from top editor and a writer, that the James Collins piece included hiding it within the newsroom, a key step in needing secrecy from an office full of reporters.

And of course, at ESPN, the top story remained the non-story, Tim Tebow the celebrity without a job or team or sport. 

The Toledo Blade is a very respected newspaper, where they've been publishing the news for more than a century, almost two in fact.

They showed their age on Wednesday when they began waving their canes at the new generation of journalists, many of whom no longer work at the newspapers that laid them off, cut their positions or just stopped paying them.

Their specific targets were at Deadspin.com, famous now for not just its humor, insight and occasional profanity but for breaking and fully reporting the Manti Te'o lies. The Toledo Blade was beaten to a story in its own backyard by Deadspin, which did not name a woman who was the subject of a coach's improper affections. The Blade later named her, and in their comments defending the naming, they said you can trust the Blade and its named sources more than some web site.

Ooops.

They're sounding very old-timey here, dismissing the new media.

Now the folks at Deadspin weren't necessarily laid off from newspapers, though several come from very respected newspapers. They are top-notch journalists who are professionals working on an online platform. The web is not just the future of publishing, it is currently the primary format, where the format does not dictate the quality of journalism. The format is just how the consumer sees, views, hears, reads, watches the story, and the format merely involves the method (and speed) with which they receive the news and the price they or others pay for it.

Less money is going to newspapers' printed products and more money is spent online. That's all there is to it.

But to 'diss' the new media as less reliable is an outright lie and deception on its readers. It's spin, it's a PR stunt and it's being properly called out.

Note, the editor who made the comment said he did not mean to diss the Deadspin guys; rather, he was just praising his guy. He referenced them being sensitive. He appears to be lying.

From the Atlanticwire.com is that comment that sparked the controversy:
The difference between the coverage of this story by The Blade and Deadspin is that (Blade writer Ryan) Autullo is a professional journalist who has named sources and you can believe what he reports.

Again, if he later says he didn't mean to say anything about the winning competitor's story, he appears to be lying. And, I suspect, he was initially covering his own blunder, holding the story out of fear his writer had something wrong.

Deadspin does fabulous work. They are quick, funny and sharp. And they get the world, sports is not just sports, news is not just official statements and reaction. They are profane. They do not hold back. And they call people out. Some of their best work is the constant analysis of the 'journalism' that goes on at ESPN, which is more brand promotion and event sponsorship than journalism.

Put down the cane and just cover your community and write your stories.

Yes, we like the improved economy... or at least I do.

But I also like these stories, and I think most readers do, too:

A police officer fired after getting called out for lying under oath.

A judge under fire after his girlfriend arrested for drunken driving while he and daughter in car.

And a judge busted by a reporter (kudos WXYZ.com) for shady deals... how could she be so dumb, putting property in kids' names is one thing, but taking it back for your after short sale??? Greed (like hormones) = stupidity.


But I also like these stories, too:

Police: Footprints lead to impaired motorist following crash on I-75 in Troy

I say, yes, absolutely.

But I understand the idea. Don't make a story out of it so we can work to get him back instead of giving potential terrorists a chance to harm him and garner their own headlines.

However, once the story is out there, it would irresponsible to ignore it, especially if the same standards are not maintained for every other story.

In this case, it is gawker.com reporting that NBC's Richard Engel is missing in Syria. Mr. Engel is a fine journalist who has done incredible work as a foreign correspondent, telling stories lately about Egypt's revolution and now Syria's civil war.

I hope his missing is a problem with communications in what seems like a war-torn country that may have damaged or turned off communications equipment. The fear is that he is injured or kidnapped or worse. His is one of the most dangerous jobs in the world and he did not seem to shy from the danger in order to do his job.

The story, though, from gawker.com deals with a serious issue: Blackouts of news coverage. Several comments, the majority on the page, were critical of gawker for writing about the story, in effect calling them out for writing about a blackout on the story and then 'violating' it.

What happens is the news agency doesn't want to report on its reporter missing as that may inflame the situation and endanger the reporter. That's fair. But in this business, or calling as some wish journalism would be, once a story is out, it's out.

Gawker correctly reports all the agencies in Europe that are reporting the news as well as people on social media.

But to insist it be held and to criticize others for reporting the news is rather disheartening, especially with all the (sometimes, rightful) criticism of news outlets (such as NBC) for the endless reporting of others' tragedies, the latest one being the Sandy Hook shootings in Connecticut. In fact, the rush to get the story out led to news agencies wrongfully reporting who the shooter was, including The Oakland Press, where we used wire reports that later had to be changed.

Many expressed desires to see the media:

- Leave the victims' families alone,
- Not flood the area with multiple reporters falling over one another,
- Not show the culprit's face and tell a story that would perhaps inspire another crazy person to act as a copycat in seeking out such media attention,
- Not politicize the event by jumping into the natural discussion about guns and gun violence and America's gun culture.

News agencies routinely ignore such requests because of the thirst to know as much as possible about something as fast as possible.

Same goes for a story about a respected journalist who goes missing while on the job in a place that generally accounts for the first or second story on NBC's "Nightly News."

And criticism that a news agency applies different standards when covering itself than it would anyone else are fair.