This site states:  "The Internet has given us the 'Blogosphere.'  A voice for average Americans like yours truly that is used to challange [sic] the Mainstream media which distorts the 'news' in order to misinform and exploit the voting public."

This site stated that "Ford hates the Internet."  But it doesn't give any indication that Ford actually said that.  What he is quoted as saying, as everywhere else, seemingly, is:

“The worst thing about the Internet is that anything and everything is up for grabs. How can that be, when I limit my public conversations to about once every couple of years? “Any kind of rubbish goes on the internet and it can have a [expletive] life of its own.”

Does this mean he hates the internet?  Maybe, maybe not. As for the quote itself,  we agree with Ford's longer quote, and we don't hate the Internet.  

The above site says that the Internet can be used to challenge the misinforming and exploitative media.   Maybe. But the Internet can also be used for that same misinformation and exploitative purpose.  And, consistent with what Ford points out,  while truth may have an inherent advantage over inaccuracy, with no check on the Internet but the responses of others (themselves with no check) this advantage, small in the non Internet world, becomes even smaller.  On the other hand, the advantage of hype over reason, which also exists outside of the Internet, again, with no check again but the opinions of others, may dramatically increase.  Sure, inaccuracy can be made into a larger story than the inaccuracy itself, but only if those with the voice to do it turn it into this. 

So what did Ford say? We attempted to find out, via the "Internet." 

It seems Ford's point may be made by the very same story that quotes him. All of these sites, state that Ford said "I hate the Internet," or some version thereof.  But nowhere is Ford directly quoted as saying this as part of his larger quote, leaving it unclear as to whether this was an interpretation of his remarks that was merely parroted from one source to another, sort of "taking on a life of its own," so to speak (as Ford says), or an actual quote. It really doesn't matter an enormous amount, because in these instances, whether the fact has been taken out of context or not is often unclear, and if it has been, again, it is often not a very big story unless some of the loudest voices on the Internet have an interest in turning it into a big story. And, again, what drives that is as much hype and agenda, as fact. 

The same site linked above, for instance, which accusing the mainstream media of "misinforming and exploiting the public" (again, see here for a different take on exactly what that means)" twice pokes fun at Al Gore for  "Inventing the internet" (a claim rendered nearly ubiquitous by the Internet itself back in 2000).  But Gore never claimed he invented the internet, but that he helped play a role in fostering IT tech that helped lead to the Internet's advancement. 

The site then claims (again, see here) that, "Harrison Ford is a typical, biased, overly-emotional Leftist; filled with misinformation, and lacking the ability to separate opinion from fact. Like other “stars” who often lack solid secondary educational credentials, his ability to reason is severely compromised."  But no information or support is offered to back this up. While the writer spoke of the Blogosphere's ability to mainstream media's ability to misinform and exploit the public, and then seemed to misinform, here he accuses Ford of being unable to separate opinion from fact, it seems, engaging in exactly that by doing so.   Or perhaps this site's author, by "his ability to reason is severely compromised," actually means, without realizing it, "his ability to see this author's particular point of view.'  And then offers, "With the lack of a spot light on him and a bad box office showing of his latest film, he feels the need to become yet another Organ Grinder Monkey for the Leftist media." Why, because he could possibly have the audacity to not particularly like the Internet, because things (such as his quote) can spread like wildfire, true or not?

Here's some more "logic" from this nevertheless very short piece: (Former President) Bill Clinton "embarrassed himself in Pakistan" by making this "this anti-free speech statement:“ "I strongly disagreed with both the creation and the publication of cartoons that were considered blasphemous to devout Muslims around the world because they depicted the Prophet."  Was it really an anti free speech statement, or just the exercise of his right of free speech that he believed that the publication of cartoons potentially insulting to particular religious groups, at this volatile time, was not the best of ideas? Clinton may be wrong, but doesn't free speech include his right to be so? (Interesting editorial with a twist on the cartoon subject).

Examples of sites like this could go on ad infinitum. But hey, Ford's a cool guy, and someone's got to have his back, right? In addition, the larger issue is important to understanding the Internet, and why the mainstream media (which now would include mainstream Internet sources) is no less critical to democracy simply because of the advancement of hundreds of thousands of instantly published opinions, many of which are themselves often based off the same set of facts, whole, incomplete, or incorrect.  And, in fact, may be more so.