I think any form of communication via the internet should not be taken lightly, including blogs. In this particular case, blogs played the largest role in causing a company to react. This raises 2 questions in my mind. One, can they repeat this at any time, such as going after other companies? And two, is this a demonstration of the strength of blogs exclusively, or rather does credit go much broader in that it is a form of internet communication? No doubt in my mind that blogs acting collectively can create influence, because blogs are made up of people communicating on the internet. What if it was a different medium, such as emails, or forums, or webmasters acting collectively -- could they achieve the same result?

IMO, yes. It's a victory for the internet, and not necessarily one form over another. Even one website can raise a rucus -- recall the two lawyers who operated a news website that took on CBS in the forged documents scandal. Another example of internet communication are the infamous forwarded emails of urban legends that precipitate in sites like factorfiction.com to dispell them. Countless companies issue announcements to dispute their claims, such as McDonald's, Pepsi, etc. I don't think one blog alone could achieve that effect, but it would have to be a collaboration of many -- just like anything else.