"Taking tainted information from trusted sources is also nothing new. It’s a convenient short hand. The more you trust the source, the less burden there is on you to investigate the facts yourself. "This sentence led to two separate trains of thought since who amongst the blogging community has not passed on what later turned out to be erroneous information?
The first train to leave the station is how conservative bloggers tend to work (some liberal bloggers do this too, to be fair). In a given blogpost there are generally links to news articles or other posts that were the impetus for a posting. That way someone can follow the links back and will know from whence your data came. Part of this practice is attribution, part of this practice is so that people can follow your links and see if they come to the same conclusion. If they don't, you'll generally hear about it, which is the best thing about the blogosphere--questioning ideas, fact-checking--quality assurance, if you will. Not accepting something at face value.
The second train has an unusual passenger. A friend of mine (comfortably liberal-leaning and living happily on the unemployment dole after being downsized) said once in a discussion "I'm as informed as I want to be." As Bookworm also says "This works for the lazy." (which is the case here). But here's the deal. "Progressives" seem to take whatever pablum is spoon-fed to them by the mainstream media at face value. Global warming, electric cars, bailouts, Keynsian economics, calls of racism, bigotry, etc. are all accepted without question, without proof (and sometimes in the face of proof that does not meet the meme of the day).
So are liberals just that lazy or do they trust the MSM that much?