How about Easonmania?

YOU ARE VISITING THE OLD MALKIN(S)WATCH. THAT'S FANTASTIC. PLEASE VISIT THE NEW MALKIN(S)WATCH WHEN YOU GET A CHANCE.

Malkin is being somewhat even-handed in her coverage of "Easongate" (can we stop with the -gate suffix now?) - in that she links to at least one more forgiving view on the substance of Jordan's remarks. It's out of character for her, but maybe she's still feeling the sting of not being accepted to Google News.

To me, Jay Rosen's explanation - essentially, that by "targeting" Jordan meant that most journalists were victims of specific mistaken identity, rather than being caught in explosions, etc. - seems the most likely, given Occam's razor. (In other words, the simplest explanation is that Jordan was not intending to break a story that CENTCOM is issuing kill-at-will orders against members of the press.)