Michelle Malkin has crossed the line.  What line? That line that separates humans with a moral core and, well, those apathetic creatures incapable of emotions like empathy or shame.  For those who haven't followed the controversy, it goes something like this:

Right now, the dark-haired, lashy, Ann Coulter understudy is happily wrapped in one of her typical controversies: a crew of students at UC Santa Cruz, my alma mater, protested some military recruiters, and Malkin got hold of a press release with their personal contact information -- a poorly conceived inclusion on the students' part, but then, these are undergraduates, not trained media flacks. Rather than calling and speaking to them herself, which is what members of the press are supposed to use such releases for, Malkin published their personal information on her website, prompting her hordes of orcish mouth-breathers to brandish their pitchforks and inundate the unsuspecting students with death threats (some of which you can read here). When the students frantically called on Malkin to remove their numbers, she posted their contact information again.

(Chris Bowers & John Amato have more).

That Malkin took advantage of the naivete of what she called "anti-war thugs" and "moonbats" is not out of character for her. Malkin's sustenance is hate--without it, she wouldn't have anything to write about. She thrives on the misery and pain of others as she peddles in racism and inflammatory rhetoric. And her readers eat it up.

Let's be real, Malkin knows her audience like the back of her hand. She publishes their emails regularly on her site, she knows the type of radical people her site attracts. So when she published the contact information, she did so with a specific purposes (conspicuously absent from her post, by the way, was her request to "be polite").  To sum up Malkin's actions in two words:  sic 'em!  

So is it surprising that Malkin's minions followed her lead and harassed the SAW students with vitriol? Nope. It is surprising they sent death threats? Of course not. Because that's the type of people Malkin's work attracts: cowardly, passive-aggressive let-me-sit-at-my-computer-and-talk-tough-because-I'm-too-afraid-to-go-to-Iraq wingers who get off on sending emails describing their wet dreams of blowing the brains out of "intolerant left wing socialist f**king c**k-suckers."

After receiving death threats from these 101st Fighting Keyboarders, the SAW students politely asked Malkin to remove the contact information from her site. Malkin refused. Indeed, she republished the contact info.  And this is where her actions turn from mean-spirited to downright sick.

By reposting the contact information knowing full well she was to elicit death threats and attack, Malkin is condoning the actions of her readers. Of course, scared Michelle posts a "disclaimer,", skirting any responsibility for the actions of her attack dogs.  But if she knowsthe threats are coming from her readers, such a disclaimer has a wink, wink, don't do it effect.  If she truly does not condone death threats and foul language, she should oblige the SAW students and remove the information from her blog.

Malkin, who considers herself a "journalist", has blatantly violated the Code of Ethics for journalists by setting her attack dogs on these students.

Minimize Harm

Ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect.

Journalists should:

• Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects. [...]
  


• Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.
  


• Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone's privacy.[...]

Bloggers don't need to be journalists to follow this code or  basic standards of human decency.  But Malkin is no journalist, nor does she have any decency. It is high time she be stripped of this designation in the media and labeled appropriately:  as a pundit who makes her living off of propaganda and hate.  Indeed, Malkin calling the SAW students "thugs" may be the clearest case of projection I've seen in the blogosphere. For it is Malkin who acts like a thug when she invites her readers to harass and intimidate students exercising their 1st Amendment rights.  

Alas, with her moral core, I doubt Malkin is even aware she's crossed the line.

Update: YukonJack reminded me that Michelle Malkin was named Keith Olbermann's "Worst Person" in the world yesterday night. Video at C&L.