Over on Mets Blog today, Star Ledger writer Dan Graziano popped up in the comments section to defend himself and the role of official blogs in journalism. Some commenter’s leveled criticism on the journo, calling him unprofessional for putting the contents of a recent email between himself and Carlos Delgado’s agent David Sloane on his blog.

The email exchange centered around the accuracy of details of Delgado’s contract as published in the one of Graziano’s recent sidebars. Graziano did not publish the email today to set the facts straight. He published the email to show all his readers that Sloane is “insane” as he clearly headlined - “Breaking News - Delgado’s Agent is Insane”

Sloane does prove himself to be a number of things, mostly unprofessional for calling Graziano a retard. He even got a yo momma dig in there for good measure. Nobody is arguing that Sloane is a normal human being.

But the post raises questions about whether the same rules that guide journalists’ stories should loosely guide what they write on their official newspaper blogs. Graziano argued via MetsBlog that since he published the email on his blog and not in the newspaper, it was kosher. According to Graziano, the blog is supposed to show the funny side of the beat writer’s experience.

While the email is in and of itself kind of funny, I think publishing it was an abuse of Graziano’s power. As a journalist myself I can’t count the number of times I wish I could publish a PR person’s rant after the fact. It happens on a weekly basis- flacks and sources call up to complain after a story runs even when they did not call you back for comment in the first place. I’ve been called names(although never a retard) and had my sourcing questioned. It’s part of the job - you argue your point, you print corrections when they are warranted and then you write your next story.

I’m sure it’s not news to other journalists that Sloane is insane, and so these sorts of exchanges should be saved for the press box. I’m not as sure that Sloane’s comments fall under the definition of what is news for most readers. It’s a slippery slope. We like to see how some of the sausage is made but I found this example a bit vindictive. While official newspaper blogs can be a little bit looser with some standards and should share some behind the scenes stories, I don’t see how they can have carte blache to fire missiles even at those that are “insane”.