The battle over the legality and ethics of news aggregation has been heating up all week. This morning we collected all of the punches thrown in the massive fight on Twitter between four journalists that went on yesterday afternoon. That all appeared to end amicably enough, with the main combatants, Nicholas Carlson and Anthony De Rosa, seemingly laughing about it this morning. Unfortunately though, the other fight on the subject, the one between The Wrap’s Sharon Waxman and Michael Wolff of Newser, has not ended nearly as well.

Yesterday, we wrote about the battle of words between Newser’s Michael Wolff and The Wrap’s Sharon Waxman, the ethics of news aggregation, and what constitutes stealing. But shouldn’t a debate about new media like this really be waged in a more modern way than Waxman’s and Wolff’s long (and abridged) columns? This is perhaps why four journalists took to Twitter to battle it out with brutal 140-character punches.

According to a recent blog post on the Tiger Woods saga, “the reports you are reading on TMZ and RadarOnline are about 30% accurate at best.” Tiger and Elin Woods aren’t moving towards divorce, Arnold Palmer is trying to help Tiger patch up his marriage, and Tiger hasn’t appeared in public since the incident in November because his face was damaged and he needed plastic surgery. Revealing? Maybe. But just as surprising is the person who posted the account — 91-year-old retired sportswriting great Furman Bisher — and his response to the 43,000+ hits the blog post has gotten: surprise and annoyance.

With the benefit of hindsight, the AOL-Time Warner merger is widely derided as a very, very bad idea. Now, on the eve of AOL’s split with Time Warner, rumors are emerging that AOL and Time Inc. are considering a “co spin-off.” Despite having both “AOL” and “Time” in the name, here’s why that merger could actually be a great idea:

Gawker stepped over the line with their Bloodcopy campaign, where they were not only guilty of blurring the line between advertisements and editorial but of nearly erasing it altogether. And yet, the entire controversy made Bloodcopy one of the most successful ad campaigns Gawker ever ran.