Editing blogs

http://poynter.org/column.asp?id=101&aid=140459

I was reading an interesting article on Poynter today about blogging live and the upsides (quick, up-t0-the-minute), and the downsides (not much time to make it interactive or multimedia-friendly). This got me thinking... what sort of editing standards are there for blogging?
I know that before an article gets up online at a news Web site, the article must be read at least once (hopefully by the wire editor, or if it's a story produced by a reporter at that company, then by the news editor), but what about blogs? Are they subjected to the same sort of editing criticisms that are given to all other things posted online?
And what if something posted on the blog went too far? Would that then be the blogger's fault for even typing it in the first place, or the editor's fault for letting it go up unnoticed? I think there's a lot of potential ethical dilemmas waiting to surface as blogging becomes even MORE popular than it is now.

Amanda,

You're right that blogs are not getting the editing they need right now. Writers have director control (at least at The Republic) in writing their blogs in blog software and uploading them directly to the site without having to go through copy or desk editors. The only time a blog entry is closely looked at is when it is a column appearing in the paper. The Republic has chosen not to differentiate between regular columns in the paper and casual blog comments. They all go into the same blog which I think can be a problem in itself because if the reader associates blogs with casual, spur of the moment thoughts that get thrown up online, they may pass up reading a well thought out column that got thrown into the mix.

As far as finding fault when a blogger messes up, I think it would fall on both parties: the blogger for not bringing a potentially controversial aspect of his or her piece to a copy editor's attention (a degree of self-edit is required here) and on the editors who are knowingly taking the risk when they allow bloggers to bypass them and post directly to the site.

The solution is complicated because it's hard to advocate forcing all blogs to go through the normal editing process, which would of course be ideal. There are too many staffers blogging every day now for the copy desk to have to go through all of them. And it would take away the great thing about blogs, which is the speed in which they can be posted. A reader can log on two or three times a day and find a new thought from their favorite blogger.

I would say to put more responsibility on the online producers. Even they can't catch everything, but they are in the best position to check up on the most popular bloggers and make sure any new content is not questionable. If there is a problem they could temporarily remove the post and pass it over to a copy editor for review.