Taibbi vs. Logan (vs. Hastings (vs. McChrystal))

So Rolling Stone's Michael Hastings takes out Gen. McChrystal by reporting what he said.

CBS' Lara Logan goes off on Hastings' credidibility, methods and ethics.

And Matt Taibbi positively beats the crap out of her for doing so.

Hey, assholes: you do not work for the people you're covering!... People like George Bush, John McCain, Barack Obama, and General McChrystal for that matter, they can afford to buy their own P.R. — and they do, in ways both honest and dishonest, visible and invisible.

They don't need your help, and you're giving it to them anyway, because you just want to be part of the club so so badly. Disgustingly, that's really what it comes down to. Most of these reporters just want to be inside the ropeline so badly, they want to be able to say they had that beer with Hillary Clinton in a bowling alley in Scranton or whatever, that it colors their whole worldview. God forbid some important person think you're not playing for the right team!...

By the severely unlikely virtue of a drunken accident we get a tiny glimpse of an answer to some...vital questions, but instead of cheering this as a great break for our profession, a waytago moment, one so-called reputable journalist after another lines up to protest the leak and attack the reporter for doing his job. God, do you all suck!

Yes, I loves the snark... but my gut is with Taibbi on this one. A reporter who has a story should run it, and self censorship in the name of "this would embarrass the troops" is not any kind of journalism.

(H/t CJR)