But then the article veers in an odd direction (MVO typos corrected where possible):
Councilmember Steve Madison, who proposed the idea, said he was surprised the idea had not already been done. "It was something in this computer age, one would expect, could be easily done," he said. Later adding, "I think all of us probably fel(t) as though transparency is a good thing, it should be." (H)e went on to say that people needed good information especially in an age where they have to deal with blogging. Something he said was notorious for giving out bad information."
Now I'd hardly disagree with the notion that blogs are often partisan operations given to filtering reporting through the political agendas of their publishers. It is pretty much the nature of the beast. But is this something solely endemic to on-line news sources such as blogs? Is Madison actually suggesting that the various print media here in the San Gabriel Valley is completely free of its own political agendas and axes to grind? And that these forms of ideological bias never influence their political reporting? Given the atrocious partisanship shown by the print media in Sierra Madre during our most recent city elections, I'd say the Pasadena council member could very well be putting the Mad in Madison here.
And let's read between the lines a bit. If blogs are such untrustworthy partisan animals, and by implication therefore appendages of existing political campaigns, is Madison also suggesting that perhaps they should somehow be forced to register their finances with the government as candidate campaign contributions?