Do you have any proof to back that assertion up? The closest thing I saw to proof was a study cited regarding Google ads which is a much different issue.
b) Same question for this assertion: "For the sad fact is that while Dr. William Connelly may be able to discern the misinformed ravings of moonbats from the wisdom of experts, the average Internet user cannot" '    

Andrew: a) Blogs aren’t edited, they aren’t fact checked, they are often authored anonymously. That’s the difference between their content and the carefully edited and fact checked content on professional media. This is enough proof for me.   b) The problem with sites like Wikipedia is that they are seductively authoritative. Kids in particular uncritically believe what they read on them. This assertion is based on conversations I’ve had with many teachers as well as my own experience as a college professor.  

Scott:  I read a great question to which I'd like to hear your response. This is from blogger Steve Boriss:

Most who write for Old Media are professional journalists, but amateurs in the topics they write about. By contrast, most of the leading, elite bloggers are experts in their specialized topic areas, but amateurs in journalism. Is the public really better off reading amateur-grade information from journalists rather than professional-grade information from non-journalists? More to the point, will they prefer it? 

Andrew: Don’t agree. Who are these elite bloggers? The intellectuals I pay to read (Christopher Hitchens, Slavoj Zizek, Jurgen Habermas, Charles Taylor, Robert Fisk, Martin Amis, Don Delillo, Howard Jacobson, Joan Didion) don’t blog. They continue to sell their work through traditional channels. Once guys like Hitchens, Delillo and Zizek start blogging (ie: giving away their valuable content for free), then maybe I start taking blogs more seriously. But, for the moment, it is generally the refuge, at best, of failed or second-rate print journalists and writers.  

Scott: Some, perhaps most famously Jeff Jarvis, have hesitated to do interviews or panel discussions with you because they think you are just taking a position in order to irk people and sell books. How do you respond to that assertion? What do you think of them referring to you variously as a troll, a talk show prostitute and a curmudgeon?  

Andrew: Never heard of the word “troll”. Yes, I’m a professional author and my business is selling books. That’s how I pay my bills. Thus I’m more than happy to appear on the media (and in this exchange) with the goal of convincing people to pay cash for my book.