Investigative Reporting

[Slamz]

Here, let's try the same track and just offer this http://mediamatters.org/countyfair/200903170003

I read the first couple paragraphs of this link and gave up. Does it get any better later on? What I read was just one big ad hominem attack on Cohen that says nothing about his examples or findings and simply attacks him as a person.

At least Cohen raised some really good points and some interesting facts to support his position.

Your link is just, "Oh yeah? Well.... Cohen is a poopoo head!"



http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies...minem.html

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:

1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B makes an attack on person A.
3. Therefore A's claim is false.

The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).

It's like the author you linked read this and followed it step by step.