.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;} <$BlogRSDUrl$>

Friday, January 23, 2004

Web Helps Martha's Case

Everyone, including myself, has been ga-ga over Marthatalks since it launched many moons ago. While some report on the site as if it were the first of its kind, I have been impressed at how Martha has leveraged the support her fans have expressed through the Web site.

Another Web site that now merits mention is Save Martha. Mostly a novelty, this site is run by a die-hard Martha fan. He started his site in support of Martha well before she launched Marthatalks and it has gotten a lot of coverage. The site was even mentioned during Martha's interview with Barbara Walters.

The importance of this site was elevated with a UPI story questioning if Martha Stewart is getting a fair shake in a trial that has not even begun presenting its case!

In the article, Double standard hurting Martha Stewart? Save Martha site founder John Hall is quoted as an expert on the trial. At best, this piece should be on the op/ed page and not on the news wire. Day three of jury selection yields no new stories so the UPI interviews a clearly biased source for a new angle on the trial.

All I know is, Martha should be sending John Hall one heckuva fruit basket post-trial...no matter HOW the trial turns out. Hall's coup brings a lot of things into question, but mostly shows how lazy one reporter can be. This is particularly true when you compare this story to how other news outlets are making due without access to the selection process.

Newsday updates us on how MSLO is doing. The New York Times looks at the role of publicity in the trial and how intense press coverage drove the prosecution to ban media from the selection process in the first place. The New York Times is among several news outlets fighting to overturn this ban. A media circus will find a way to have its show.