Might it help to make it even clearer how little time is left by adding a timestamp to your original post, and/or make some sort of a timer. It would be terrible if part of the crowd decides not to forward this because there's unclarity regarding the remaining amount of time.

What is Huesken asking for? Boil it down: He wants Andrew to code up an "Is my dad dead yet" widget. So unseemly, and yet so typical: Even when dealing with something as horrific as the imminent death of a parent, Internet users just want us to think about them and their needs.

Andrew Baron has denied he knew anything. But troublingly, he also says his dad didn't know about the affair, which strains belief — considering that it was Fred Baron's ongoing financial assistance to Hunter which blew Edwards's cover. I'm inclined to believe that the younger Baron was not, in fact, wise to the arrangement, and it's only natural to stick up for family. Unless you purport to be a news organization, in which case recusal is your best bet.

Because it all makes Rocketboom's original coverage of the Edwards campaign look all the more fawning and uninformed in retrospect. By continuing to toe the family line in public adds fuel to a story that, like Edwards's political career, no longer really matters. While one might be willing to forgive the original faux pas of letting the campaign lead you around by the news nose, it doesn't help perceptions of questionable "new media" journalist ethics to continue to deny, deny, deny.

As long as the younger Baron continues to trumpet his father's innocence in public, the more Rocketboom looks like it traded access for complicity, even if unintentionally. Andrew should probably take his own advice and "take a few days off."

"Who's your daddy and what does he do?"

Andrew Baron's involvement in the Edwards campaign has drawn notice before. The younger Baron failed to disclose that he was getting paid to do campaign videos which he packaged as interviews:

...Edwards tells Rocketboom's Joanne Colan — a former British MTV VJ — that places like Rocketboom.com are "one of the best ways to reach people" as part of his campaign to change America "from the ground up." But in the "interview," neither Edwards nor Colan disclose that there was a financial relationship between the Edwards campaign and Rocketboom.com, as [Washington Post's Howard] Kurtz reports.

But in their outrage over the undisclosed payments, no one stopped to ask how Baron, a relative unknown videoblog producer, got the gig in the first place. The notion that Edwards was buying blogger buzz satisfied even hardcore media reporters like Kurtz. It never occurred to them that the quid pro quo might be working in reverse.

By crowning Andrew Baron a rising star among videobloggers, worthy of a ride in the Edwards campaign jet, Edwards was boosting a business in which one of his backers, Fred Baron, had a financial interest. What a win-win-win! Andrew Baron got a job and a hot interview; Edwards got promotion as the Internet's candidate of the moment; and Fred Baron got two of his causes advanced. The Edwards campaign may have foundered, but the interview gave Rocketboom the kind of credibility that eventually paid off in an exclusive, seven-figure distribution deal with Sony. (To cap it all off, we've heard rumors that the jet actually belonged to Fred Baron, who reportedly loaned his plane out to Edwards from time to time.)

But Andrew Baron's credibility as a journalist is very much on the line now. Robert Scoble suggested that Baron had expressed relief that the affair was "out in the open." Did that mean the younger Baron knew about it at the time? The elder Baron certainly did. It was the money trail that Fred Baron laid which eventually led to Rielle Hunter's outing.

We asked Chuck Olsen, Baron's Rocketboom shooter, who was aboard the blogger plane back in 2006 at the time of the Edwards' campaign announcement, what he thought of this theory. Here's what he said:

"It's certainly possible that Andrew knew about the possibility of the affair. But, I don't think Andrew has been involved with the Edwards campaign since it launched. I'd guess Andrew's face time with his dad concerned Rocketboom business, not Rielle Hunter."

If so, that's too bad. Andrew could have helped out dad by giving Rielle Hunter a gig on Rocketboom. Two birds, one stone.

(Photo by Robert Scoble)

Alas, no luck. We called Scoble and asked if he had any footage of Hunter. "God knows," says Scoble. He filmed Edwards while working for Podtech, the ill-fated online-video startup which was recently sold for a pittance. His raw footage from that period, if any, is jumbled with the rest of Podtech's assets.

But Chuckumentary videographer Chuck Olsen, a contributor to Rocketboom, did catch Hunter in one of his videos of the Edwards campaign. Fast forward to 1:07 and you'll get a quick glimpse of Hunter, earning part of her $114,000 behind the camera. Update: Olsen has sold the video to the AP and taken it off Revver.

He's a leading Dallas attorney who even sued the firm he cofounded, Baron & Budd, and is a regular on blog Overlawyered. More interesting is that Amanda Congdon intervened in order to protect her claim on part of the company. Meanwhile, the younger Baron complains all this legal wrangling tied his dealmaking hands, and that the company nearly went broke twice this year.

The Rocketboom episode neatly explains why the world of online video so resembles film school, a parent-funded enterprise of self-indulgent auteurs with macroambitions viewed by microaudiences (including yours truly). Sony's deal doesn't affirm the potential of online video as a means of creative expression; it simply tells us that the rich, despite themselves, can't help getting richer. (Photos by Eric Skiff and Alex de Carvalho)

In a wonderful piece of linkbait, Vanity Fair produced an illustration featuring a number of popular "blogs" arranged in a cartesian graph from "Scurrolous" to "Earnest" on one axis and "Opinion" to "News" on another. While we're trying to grasp how the 'Wag ended up on the earnest side of the scale, more confusing is the inclusion of Salon and Slate. Apparently, if you're not printed on paper, you're a "blog" — even though both publications predate the term. But where the chart really gets things wrong is in using the disembodied head of Amanda Congdon to illustrate online video program Rocketboom. If the authors or illustrator actually watched the show or read many of the listed blogs, they'd know that Joanne Colan took over as host after a very nasty and public departure from the show by Congdon. Keep trying, guys, you're bound to figure out this Internet thing eventually!

Baron also told us that despite rumors to the contrary, host Joanne Colan will not be leaving the show. "That was just a rumor," said Baron. "Gawker writers these days get paid by pageviews so I think they sometimes just make stuff up." Trust us, if we made up posts for pageviews, they would involve drug warehouse orgies with prostitutes and private jets turned into hot boxes, not a host leaving a low-budget Web show.

No news yet on whether Baron will try to hire a third host for his show, which would mean the show had as many hosts as it's had paying advertisers.

It would be silly to just delete this account I have here, especially if there is someone out there that had like interests and had something to say or wanted to get involved in some relevant conversations.

No, it's to leverage Twitter's potential as a generator of links which increase websites' ranking in Google's search results. The good news for heavy Twitter users is that this sets the price of followers at around a dollar each. Maybe following every single account that adds you, spammer or otherwise, isn't such a bad idea after all. The only reason top Twitter user Jason Calacanis isn't selling his account? He's already using it for spam that promotes his business. (Photo by Dummycast.com's JA Donnelly)

In his post, Baron gripes about Calacanis's "aggressive marketing tactics" to promote Mahalo Daily, the site's videoblog with former CNET host Veronica Belmont. But in a reply to Baron's attacks, Calacanis guesses the antipathy stems from Calacanis's public attempt to hire Amanda Cogdon after she quit Rocketboom.

Yeah, it could be that. Or it could be that in Mahalo Daily's launch trailer, Calacanis and Belmont parodied "Rocketboom" on Mahalo Daily and Calacanis said, "Hm. Been thinking about it. Rocketboom just isn't that funny."

There's only one way to resolve this, of course. No, not a catfight between Belmont and Rocketboom anchor Joanne Colan, pervs. Instead: Bulldog love!

ABC can dismiss the failure as an experiment:

It's been a great year with Amanda — a great experiment for both of us. We thank her for her many contributions and know that she's about to embark on new endeavors and expect there will be times in the future that we can again work together.

One thing we can count on: Congdon will bounce back, perky as ever. She has a show in development for HBO — technically, according to HBO's advertising, that's "not television," so we don't know if that will count as a TV comeback. And she seems to have a burgeoning if ethically questionable career as a spokesblogger for advertisers like DuPont and American Express. The only question: Will anyone care? Or has her audience, like ABC, tired of her "experiments"?

Not anytime soon, especially if they keep bickering on the popular videoblogging Yahoo group. This past weekend, Amanda and former Rocketboom partner Andrew Baron let loose on the group's email list. Andrew forwarded several emails, all reprinted after the jump, trying to prove his points.

"It's okay to say what you need to say, get it out and move on, but that didn't happen originally," Andrew wrote on his personal blog. "So this weekend, I finally set out to get it all out and off my chest and I did."

"As you can see, I spent legal fees on the HBO opportunity...but you stole it away for yourself...Lie #2. Resolved." declared Andrew on the Yahoo group, after forwarding a communication regarding a prospective deal with HBO.

"This proves what? That I (not you) had an HBO meeting and that I fired my manager?" Amanda shot back. "The best way to avoid factual statements is to ask questions," countered Andrew.

This caused one of the old guards of the blogosphere, Robert Scoble, to jump in: "This isn't impressing me in the least about either party. I don't really care anymore. You both are polluting this group and it needs to stop, and stop now."

Selected E-Mails, Roughly in Chronological Order

***
Sent By: Andrew Baron

Begin forwarded message:
> From: "Amanda Congdon"
> Date: June 2, 2006 2:20:46 PM EDT
> To: "Thompson, Bryan"
> Cc: "Johnson, Channing" , "andrew michael
> baron" , "Jim Congdon"
>
> Subject: Re: Matthew Lesher, semi-urgent
>
> Bryan and Channing,
>
> Thank you for getting back to me on this so quickly. As it turns
> out, the HBO meeting is now happening on Monday rather than later
> today. The introductory meeting between Ari, Andrew and me is still
> on as scheduled at 3pm Pacific. How does this change the order of
> events, if at all?
>
> Yes, please prepare Matthew's termination letter.
>
> Thanks again,
>
> Amanda
>
> On 6/2/06, Thompson, Bryan < bthompson@...> wrote:
> Amanda:
>
> I spoke to Channing about this. We think that your analysis of the
> situation is spot-on accurate and that it would be appropriate for
> you now to terminate your relationship with Matthew.
>
> Accordingly, we believe that you should inform Matthew, both orally
> and in writing, that your relationship with him is now terminated.
> You should also inform him that he is not to participate in the HBO
> conference call, nor is he to contact or speak with HBO or Endeavor
> concerning you, Andrew, or Rocketboom.
>
> Let me know if you would like us to prepare a letter to Matthew
> concerning this.
>
> In order to assure that Matthew is not on the call, you will need
> to contact him orally before the call. Even if we sent a letter
> right now, he might not actually read it before the HBO call
> begins. When you speak to him you can let him know that a letter
> will be coming.
>
> From: amazingamanda@... [mailto:amazingamanda@...] On
> Behalf Of Amanda Congdon
> Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 10:19 PM
> To: Johnson, Channing; Thompson, Bryan; andrew michael baron
> Cc: Jim Congdon
> Subject: Matthew Lesher, semi-urgent
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I spoke with Matthew Lesher this evening. I asked him why Ari
> Emanuel would be under the impression he was Rocketboom's manger.
> He said he didn't know, that maybe Ari just "assumed" as much. He
> then said, in fact, that both he and Ari had no interest in the
> management of Rocketboom. He also said that because Ari (and thus
> Endeavor) were not involved in the book deal, that he felt Ari was
> being "aggressive" in wanting 10% equity in Rocketboom. I asked him
> why he then jumped on the bandwagon and asked for the same thing
> (on Friday Matthew brought up getting 10% too). He started back
> peddling and saying that we were just beginning the conversation,
> that nothing had been decided. I told him it sounded like he didn't
> have my best interests in mind, and he said no, he was just
> presenting all the options. If he truly had my best interest in
> mind, he would have told me he thought Ari was being aggressive on
> Friday, not now after I pressed him about it. Bottom line is that I
> don't trust him, so I believe the relationship will have to be
> terminated. I would love to hear what everyone else thinks.
>
> The big issue now is that I have a conference call today (Friday)
> scheduled with Caroline Strauss at HBO to workshop show ideas at
> 2:30 Pacific, and I don't want Matthew in on that. Ari is the only
> one that had anything to do with setting that up. Matthew also has
> included himself in an introductory conversation that was supposed
> to happen directly before the HBO meeting, with Andrew, Ari and
> me. Andrew just sent me an email suggesting perhaps the talk with
> Matthew occur very shortly before the HBO meeting is scheduled, so
> as not to give Matthew time to backlash before the meeting. Help
> please!!
>
> Thanks so much for all of your guidance,
>
> Amanda

**

On Dec 16, 2006, at 1:35 PM, Amanda Congdon wrote:

> This proves what? That I (not you) had an HBO meeting and that I fired
> my manager?

**

On Dec 16, 2006, at 6:36pm, andrew michael baron wrote:

> The best way to avoid factual statements is to ask questions.

**

From: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com [mailto:videoblogging@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of Digital Buddha
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 10:49 AM
To: videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [videoblogging] Re: OOoh, Amanda's Up!

Andrew and Amada, I admire your work both when you were working together,
and now independently of one another. I am embarrassed for the two of you
with your public display. The court of public opinion is not the one to
discuss this. It may not seem like poor judgement today to either of you,
but you may be thinking much differently a year or two from now.

Please, please, please take it off line. You are now at the stage of
"virtual shouting". I am waiting for objects to start to fly. It will just
get uglier. I hope you and your respective legal counsel will be able to
settle this swiftly.

**

Sent By: Robert Scoble

I agree. This isn't impressing me in the least about either party.

I don't really care anymore. You both are polluting this group and it needs
to stop, and stop now.

Take it onto your blogs where, if we care, we can read your slings at each
other.

Robert

**

Sent By: Andrew Baron

I only ever made one demand in the history of Rocketboom; only once
did I ever put my foot down.

The last letter to Amanda before she quit:

Begin forwarded message:

Chuck's letter to Amanda:

Hey Amanda,

I just talked to Andrew and he's basically ready to take control of
Rocketboom.
I think no matter what, he's exercising his 51% and taking control of
the business.
He wants to know what you want to do.

Everyone wants you to be the face of Rocketboom.
Would you be happy producing shows in the next month while figuring
out a way to get you to LA and decide what happens next?

Given the state of things, right now Andrew wants you to be talent
and talk to the press,
and probably produce shows, but no more involvement beyond that.

I told Andrew you guys really need to make a clean break and not have
some inbetween state.
Nobody knows what that looks like, still, but this buys a month of
time for everyone to plan for
life beyond that.
............

Here is Amand'a response:
http://panther.video.blip.tv/uploadedFiles/Unboomed-
amanda_unboomed_s509.mov

Then, she went on to hang up the dirty laundry on her blog:
http://www.amandaunboomed.blogspot.com/

**

The full thread is available in the Yahoo group archives.

[Photo of Andrew: Hamletphase on flickr]