Over the weekend Matt Yglesias went and criticized the Sheinhardt Wig Company, and late last night his CAP overlord popped onto his blog to disavow the sentiments.
Now, besides being a remarkably tone deaf PR move, and a gross violation of all internet traditions, it struck me as a bit stupid. Does this now mean that CAP implicitly endorses Matt's blog posts? Sure, he's writing for himself only, but when some posts rise to the level of late-night blog-intruding disavowals, and others don't, doesn't that create an editorial distinction?
The incident has already generated more comments on Matt's blog then I've ever seen before, and it's generating a quite a bit of discussion around the blogosphere. If it's accomplished anything at all, it's cemented the phrase "hyper-timid incrementalist bullshit" as the slogan of the Third Way.
PR accomplished!
