skippy the bush kangaroo

Wednesday, December 14, 2005

de long view on the froomkin affair

our story so far: new washpost ombudsperson deborah howell complained that daniel froomkin's online column "white house briefing" not only was slanted liberal, but was, with its title, misleading many readers into thinking the column was written by one of the washpost's white house reporters.

political reporters at the post don't like wpni columnist dan froomkin's "white house briefing," which is highly opinionated and liberal. they're afraid that some readers think that froomkin is a post white house reporter.

john harris, national political editor at the print post, said, "the title invites confusion. it dilutes our only asset -- our credibility" as objective news reporters. froomkin writes the kind of column "that we would never allow a white house reporter to write. i wish it could be done with a different title and display."

this is a bad thing, apparently. although we wonder how the words at the top of the blog, "by daniel froomkin, columnist" would make people think it was written by "daniel froomkin, white house reporter for the washington post." (and, we are of similar minds with the washpost reader who, commenting on harris' remark about confusion, told harris he was complaining that his "three reporters on the white house lap dance beat are being confused with froomkin. you wish.")

now, the story gets interesting. after many readers, including jay rosen, tried to get both howell and harris to cough up a real number of "readers" who were "confused" by the title of the blog, harris came up with one: "conservative blogger" patrick ruffini.

but patrick is more than a "conservative blogger," as josh marshall points out, by linking to brad de long, who actually called and spoke to john harris about this whole fiasco:

q: can you give any examples--other than republican national committee ecampaign director patrick ruffini http://www.patrickruffini.com/archives/2005/10/same_fight.php--of people who are seriously confused about dan froomkin's role at wpni?

a: i cannot comment for the record because i've promised i won't comment on this.

q: did you, when you sent your answers to jay rosen yesterday, know that your "grassroots conservative weblogger" patrickk ruffini had been a republican campaign operative in 2004?

a: i cannot comment for the record because i've promised that i won't comment on this.

q: did you, when you sent your answers to jay rosen yesterday, know that your "grassroots conservative weblogger" patrick ruffini was now ecampaign director for the republican national committee?

a: i cannot comment for the record because i've promised that i won't comment on this.

so basically, what we have is yet another example of the repubbbs trying to intimidate, discredit, or otherwise destroy somebody they perceive to be against them (and, sad to say, another example of the main stream media going along with it).

as we've said elsewhere, the neocons in charge view truth, facts and unbiased reporting that holds government accountable as "liberal," and that, above all, must be quashed.

posted by skippy at 4:14 PM |