I hold dry rumors about a candidate’s political strategy in a fundamentally different category than I do rumors about intensely personal issues, such as whether somebody mothered the child she claims.

The former can and should be easily reported or debated when the news merits, either because it is credible or merely because exploring the rumor says something about the political process, as in this case. The latter should be handled with enormous care and delicacy by any concerned — mainstream media, blogs, everyday folks alike.

If investigation shows it is true and newsworthy, by all means report it. If not — caveat scriptor. There are unquestionably cases where the press has no responsibility to promulgate rumors — in fact, its responsibility may be exactly the opposite.

Again, I know from your previous postings on this matter that you disagree, embracing the principle that all manner of muck can safely be slung around the Internet in the confidence that the wisdom of the crowds will separate truth from lie.

I simply don’t see it that way. I believe the role of a responsible press is to use its best judgment on what is true, newsworthy, and relevant. We have plenty of other outlets for rumors and lies — as we always have, since long before the birth of the Internet. They have their role. The press — those who consider themselves responsible journalists, whatever their means of publication — has its own.