A story appeared in the blog Left in the West this week that purports to be about the “ethical conflictions” of an independent source with ties to Congressman Denny Rehberg.

In what has become the norm, the blogger promoting the story felt obligated to point out that because Dr. Craig Wilson’s son works for Rehberg, the professor should be excluded from weighing in on any future story involving the Congressman. The blogger went on to question whether Wilson’s professorship qualifies him as a political expert.

While I don’t claim to be an expert on experts, I think most would agree a Ph.D. warrants some recognition. However, in Wilson’s case, the real deciding factor in the author’s use of the term ‘political expert’ may result from the fact he’s been offering his insight into the realm of Montana politics for over three decades. Regardless, whether Wilson deserves to be referred to as an expert in his field of study is not the case in point.

The real question is whether or not a purported expert should be able to weigh in on a story if that individual can be directly linked to the subject matter at hand. If indeed there is an “ethical confliction”—if such a phrase were to exist—perhaps the expert should recuse themselves from commenting on the story.

Unfortunately, Montana has about as many qualified political analysts as it does successful bloggers. For the sake of argument, let’s all agree that Wilson should be excluded from commenting on any story involving the Congressman. However, to be fair, we should agree that his replacement not only possess a similar background in the field of political science, but also have no ties whatsoever to Rehberg. Continue reading →