Bill, you left out other possible categories, such as "right-wing subversive who drops manure bombs though the mail slots of the self-important" or "cranky prankster with a taste for salacious humor".

If I have to choose, though, I guess I vote for "a mix of both".

"Serious journalism" with occasional humor - This is just my impression based on the volume of posts for each type.

Ok, follow-up - when I do a fake "interview" or moonbat expedition - how often do you mistake it for the "real" thing?

Never. But I have a sensory apparatus that is able to detect irony. Some people don't.

Unintentional humor?

Heh, sure.

Question 1: I thought it was some kind of floor wax.

Followup: Never. If anything, the moonbats are almost beyond parody. (That doesn't mean for you to stop doing the expeditions/interviews, because they're damned funny.)

Well, to take the question seriously for just a second, it was your interview with Bob Schieffer that made me put you on my blogroll. Hundreds of blogs (it seemed) were commenting on Memogate, but you were one of the few who actually did some journalism instead of media analysis. Those efforts, at least in my mind, have framed what you do ever since. Thus, reading the moonbat interviews and the like always strikes me as something you do for fun, not necessarily to increase your audience and raise your profile (although those can flow naturally from having fun.)

Besides, it's a blog. Nobody expects mission statements from blogs.

"serious journalism" and satire. but no iron maiden reviews please!

Let's face it, we've mostly come to expect entertainment from every outlet, which is one reason MSM news is so twisted and Jon Stewart is taken seriously by a wide swath of slackers and irony afficianados.

I'm not sure that the real market appreciates anything that takes itself too seriously. If you factor in the migration to internet access of pretty much everything - shopping, mail, job searches, relationships, work and news - it may be a developed melange response to the world as funneled by computer. Then again, it could just be more of the same, short-attention span consumers who want to know what's going on, but they really want a good laugh.

So I don't know who you are or why you're here, but I've made an effort to express appreciation for both the unmatched journalism and farce, and I show up daily to see what's popped out of that unique, egg-shaped head of yours.

Come on, Bill. You know you can't have it both ways. You're either a serious journalist or a guy who tells jokes. Your integrity is at stake here, man!

And more Iron Maiden reviews, please.

I know what you're getting at. I think John is ticked because he defended you to his audience. Your radio show is relatively new. There is not enough history for people discern whether the interviews are faked or real, satire or straightforward. It seems like with the caliber of people you are interviewing, playing it straight would lead to great interviews without having to set something up. That being said, I do come here more for the snark than the real news.

Maybe it's better to leave it undefined; what does it matter? Funny thing though... reflecting on your question I realized I'm still craving more excerpts from Barbra Boxer's new pornella. I keep wondering if our heroine will end up doing something nasty with a grumpy whiney fat dude in rectangle glasses from Michigan.

For me, "Serious Journalism" has become what Hair Bands were to music. The whole genera of "Serious Journalism" is built on pretense, sanctimony and an absence of humor. At least those gawd-awful hair bands were getting rich making fun of themselves, never ashamed to admit what ideas they made up or what ideas they stole.

What I love most about blogs is the honesty that bubbles up through the mania of it all; the quirky nature of the blogger that destroys all pretense of objectivity. Honest subjectivity openly stated may well be the most trustable form of objectivity anyone can reasonably hope for.

Shoot, OF COURSE it's both, worse yet, John should know that also. I think some people are just embarrassed that they didn't get the joke right away. For some one whose never read ASV, I could give them the benefit of the doubt, but Hawkins should have caught the key phase "Jew friend" and known it was a put on based on his knowledge of Michele's stance on anti-semetism.

Why can't serious journalism include humor... seriously?

Jon Stewart uses the news as a vehicle for his humor - if something has to be lost, it is usually the truth.

But someone like John Stossel, on the other hand, is often quite humorous; but he never lets the humor get in the way of the truth.

You don't really fit either model perfectly, but humor is certainly no enemy of the truth. Is it?

Obviously it's both. And both are better than Jon Stewart and the MSM.

I've always pegged you as someone whose basic purpose is legit journalism, but presented in your own voice, which happens to be quite humorous. Sort of the way I think of Jonah Goldberg.

Bill,
I'd like to think of your site as serious news with a smile. I came here originally for the serious news. After the election, I stayed around because of the humor. I like hearing your opinions because they aren't rants (well, not usually) and they are laced with a smile.
Does that answer your question?
Oh yeah, I've never had a problem telling the difference.

That's a ridiculous question. Most publications are a mix of several genres--like The New York Times mixes news items with those wonderful, parodies of Leftist dementia by Maureen Dowd. Bill, are saying the Moonbat items are not serious anthropological inquiry?
..and what of Dr. Streelburg!?? Dr. Streelburg!?
You're telling me he's not real!??

Let me put this succintly: BAM!!

succinctly, if I could spell

AS A CITIZEN JOURNALIST I DEMAND MORE MOONBAT PHOT EXPEDITIONS AND MORE POSTS ON WONKETTES ASS F*CKING FETISHES!!!

Seriously, if a blog has to choose between serious and funny than it's time for me to call it quits.

I've never had a problem telling the difference between news and satire on your site, and I like them both. That said, I WAS had on the whole "Catalino-gate". And so what? I LOVE practical joking; I instigate it a lot and I'm had by it a lot, too. It seems like the only ones to get their panties in a bunch about being had were the ones who took it as an opportunity to jump into the (made-up) fray and pile on either Michele or you guys. They were exposed by doing so and are blaming you guys for their own actions. Ho hum.

And I'll have to agree with Bodissey, that you're a nice mix of "right-wing subversive who drops manure bombs though the mail slots of the self-important" or "cranky prankster with a taste for salacious humor". Keep it up, please!

T Marcell,

I've got some bad news, my friend: those aren't parodies...

Uh, okay...but Johnny Apple?
C'mon, that's a nom de comedie, right?
Plus, I love that guy Krugman, what with all the delusional ranting, the hyperbole, the paranoia--man, does that guy do a great Left-wing stereotype or what!? HAAahahaaHAHAAa!!!!

Anyone can be funny, but people with no sense of humor *COUGH*Hawkins*COUGH* are hilarious.

Bill: news and humor. One quality that marks you out is your talent for pulling the humor out of the news, as in your moonbat-sighting reports: news, yes, but humor by the way you report them.
I am a little puzzled at your implying, above, that "a moonbat expedition" is not "the real thing." There are moonbats; you take their pictures and post them with commentary (lots in Latin). That's real.

If this is a humor blog, then you need to just quit right now.

Or you could quit visiting the site, one or the other. Personally I think you should take a hike. But that's just me.

Well, in his defense, Willow, Larry is the "viewer." So really, he's allowed to tell Bill what to do.

There's like a law or something.

Well, Bill, its not like you've been giving us all the free ice cream we are entitled to. Look at the last moonbat expedition's date, sheesh

Hawkins got proven wrong in public even though he should have known better, so he's shifting blame to you. I wouldn't worry about it, the guy's so partisan he'd defend Tom DeLay if a video came out of DeLay snorting coke out of a hooker's crack.

Obviously you are both. And that’s a good thing.

In this case, your humor has served us all journalistically by exposing an uptight, curmudgeonly, fossil for what he truly is (but I am glad he votes Republican.)

And BTW, without you, Goldstein is nothing. Nothing!

That last part might win you an "extra special best comment ever" award ...

By the way, many of the above comments were very nice. Praise uneccessary, but thanks all.

Hey, I'll accept that award. First, I'd like to thank...

Anyway, I think there is a trait that separates your/our crowd from the KOS/DU people (and we should probably throw the Hawkins types from the Right into that "other" crowd too).

We’ll give you props when you deserve it. But there will be no blind praise.

And if you ever pull something like a memogate, we’ll damn sure call your ass on it.

This is one funny blog-war.
The funniest part, to me, is people actually getting angry over weirdo humor from the chronicler of Martha Stewart's jail-time and the Documenter of the Moonbat Swarm.

What's next, getting angry because Glenn Reynolds just keeps linking to other people's stuff?

I'm just all depressed that I was at the Nats game and didn't hear the broadcast.
Oh well.

Bill,

You don't have a humorous blog, nor do you have a serious blog. What you have is *your* blog. I like "Bill from INDC's" blog--to h*ll with the opinions of the rest.

That said, I'm thinking of changing my little livejournal into a real blog. I read lots of bloggers who don't post every day, so if they can get away with it I should be able to as well. :-P

What prompts the question?

Did someone suggest to you that humor and serious journalism, in all their various forms, must be kept in separate blogs, lest there be a release of toxic and deadly cyanide gas?

::cough:: I don't feeel soooo........ ::thud::

You once wrote something that I agreed with and made me think you believed everything exactly the same way I do therefore it is your responsibility to never say or do anything different that might confuse or contradict me.

/my in-box

I came for the Moonbat reports, and stayed for the occasional sci-fi commentary. Funny is good. Serious has its place, but is not as good as funny. If they could be combined, you would have something. You do pretty well most of the time.