Last week, along with many other members of the media, we got spammed by dozens of Ron Paul bots.The bots were “appalled” that we weren’t “fulfilling our obligations as journalists” by writing about their candidate. They complained of a “media blackout,” and the usual elite media “conspiracy.”
(We assume plenty of smart people support Ron Paul, but we didn’t hear from any of those people. We heard from bots that were apparently commanded by some uber-bot to spam media organisations with complaints disguised as actual notes).
Well, in case there’s any confusion, here’s why we don’t write much about Ron Paul:
He has zero chance of winning. So at this point, he’s just shouting down a rain-barrel.
Ron Paul is persistent and committed, which we admire. But a lot of people in this country are persistent and committed, and we don’t write much about most of them, either. Because being persistent and committed doesn’t make you newsworthy.
If Ron Paul wants to keep wasting his supporters’ money and time by campaigning until the bitter end, he’s entitled to do that. It’s a free country. And as long as Ron Paul’s supporters don’t mind throwing their money down a rat hole, we don’t mind the occasional whiny note complaining that we don’t write about him enough.
But enough with the Ron Paul bot spam, please.
It’s unbecoming for a candidate who prides himself on telling it like it really is.
NOW WATCH: Briefing videos
Business Insider Emails & Alerts
Site highlights each day to your inbox.