All the worst aspects of the blogosphere and the mainstream media came to the forefront with the wildfire-like spreading of the gossip item from Joe McGinnis' new book, "The Rogue," that Sarah Palin and ex-basketball star Glen Rice had engaged in hanky panky 24 years ago in Alaska.

Googling the phrase "Palin Glen Rice" resulted in an astonishing 22,900,000 hits and there are undoubtedly lots more now. Without looking at each and every one of them, I can safely say that many or most simply passed the item along and maybe added a snarky comment or two.

No attempt to independently weigh whether the rumor could be true and if so, how (remotely possible since Rice played in a tournament in Alaska back then) ... no attempt to say what this means or why anyone should care ... no attempt to determine if McGinnis can be considered a reliable source (he can't). This is why Internet news and information can't be trusted unless you absolutely are sure of the source. It has little or no commitment to veracity.

The mainstream media virtually ignored doing full stories, aside from book reviews, on Palin-Rice and other material in the book. This helps show why they've been losing readers in droves, as this is a subject readers obviously care about and would like to learn more about.

There are plenty of legitimate angles and issues for proper journalists to explore.

The book is based on sensational comments from anonymous sources. McGinnis uses flimsy phrases like "friends recall ...  “some who think” ... "one resident" ... “a remarkable number of fair-minded” Alaskans say this about her ... and so on. How can it be believable?

The book is published by Random House. Is the book industry in such desperate condition that even a respected publisher has to print a shaky expose of a controversial celebrity to survive?

What is McGinnis' track record? His best-seller in the 1980s, "Fatal Vision," dealt with the murder case of Army doctor Jeffrey MacDonald, accused of killing his pregnant wife and two small children. McGinnis' insurance company had to pay up after MacDonald sued, contending McGinnis had deceived him by pretending he thought him innocent to string him along into talking more though he really thought him guilty. What does this portend, again, for believability of the Palin book?

McGinnis became notorious for renting a cabin next to Palin's in Alaska; she spotted him out on the deck peering around, then put up a wooden fence in between. While aggressiveness is viewed as a virtue for a reporter, did McGinnis cross over the line to attempted intimidation and harassment? 

If this isn't too touchy, Palin was widely reviled by the left during her vice-presidential run as a racist. Googling the phrase "Palin racist" turned up 11,500,000 hits. How valid is that calumny in light of her alleged fling with Rice, and McGinnis' claim that she "had a fetish" for black men?

Earlier this year, 24,361 pages of Palin's official e-mails from her first two years as governor were released. Even though the hostile New York Times and Washington Post put together special teams to comb through them, and the Huffington Post, not exactly friendly to Palin, either, asked its readers to send back anything "interesting" they found in them, not one single seriously derogotary revelation was unearthed. How can the dirty Palin depicted by McGinnis square with the clean Palin as revealed in her personal thoughts she never dreamed would see the light of day? 

On the other hand, if even a little bit of the book is true (at one point, for example, McGinnis accuses Palin of having snorted cocaine off the top of an oil drum) it could damage her hopes, if she has them, for running again for high office or simply continuing as a high-profile commentator?

"The Rogue" may very well become another best-seller for McGinnis and if so, he and his book should receive competent scrutiny from the media.

(Dan Amundson contributed to this item.)