The New(s) Access Brokers: So Much for the “Impartial Center”
When Dan Froomkin described on Tuesday why the oldtimers at the WaPo had him fired, he spoke a lot about the Holy Grail of the impartial center. Granted, Froomkin described the now-departed Len Downie as that cult’s High Priest. Nevertheless, it sounds like that "impartial center" can be bought for $25,000 to $250,000 a shot.
For $25,000 to $250,000, The Washington Post is offering lobbyists and association executives off-the-record, nonconfrontational access to "those powerful few" — Obama administration officials, members of Congress, and the paper’s own reporters and editors.
The astonishing offer is detailed in a flier circulated Wednesday to a health care lobbyist, who provided it to a reporter because the lobbyist said he feels it’s a conflict for the paper to charge for access to, as the flier says, its “health care reporting and editorial staff."
The offer — which essentially turns a news organization into a facilitator for private lobbyist-official encounters — is a new sign of the lengths to which news organizations will go to find revenue at a time when most newspapers are struggling for survival.
Now, Mike Allen skewers his former employer, the WaPo, pretty seriously (and deservedly) for this.
"Washington Post Salons are extensions of The Washington Post brand of journalistic inquiry into the issues, a unique opportunity for stakeholders to hear and be heard," the flier says. "At the core is a critical topic of our day. Dinner and a volley of ideas unfold in an evening of intelligent, news-driven and off-the-record conversation. … By bringing together those powerful few in business and policy-making who are forwarding, legislating and reporting on the issues, Washington Post Salons give life to the debate. Be at this nexus of business and policy with your underwriting of Washington Post Salons."
But I want to know about the other side of the equation. Which members of Congress and the Administration have agreed to participate? Did they know of the payoffs the lobbyists will make to host the events? And did the politicians expect anything in return? Or will they just be able to order up some WaPo scolding every time citizens demand real health care reform of their elected representatives? In other words, what is clear from this is that the WaPo doesn’t give a shit about neutrality, they care only about an illusion of "objectivity." But what remains unclear is the rest of the equation–just how the WaPo managed to insert itself as the facilitator between lobbyists and our government–and the gatekeeper chasing citizens away at the same time.
Update: WaPo’s full CYA:
A flyer was distributed this week offering an “underwriting opportunity” for a dinner on health-care reform, in which the news department had been asked to participate.
The language in the flyer and the description of the event preclude our participation.
We will not participate in events where promises are made that in exchange for money The Post will offer access to newsroom personnel or will refrain from confrontational questioning. Our independence from advertisers or sponsors is inviolable.
There is a long tradition of news organizations hosting conferences and events, and we believe The Post, including the newsroom, can do these things in ways that are consistent with our values.
cue WAPO damage control. Per Politico:
Post spokesperson Kris Coratti has now sent the following statement to POLITICO:
Well, at least they’re embarassed enough to do damage control. I expected firm “No Comments” from all concerned.
Boxturtle (Their story might even be true. Just as damaging, IMO)
Someone high up approved it. Bob Woodward is getting pimped!!
Woodward often acts like a pimp
Can you believe Woodward never told Downie that he knew about the identity of Plame and who had come to him. All the while Woodward was out ripping up the investigation into Plame’s outing calling it “much ado about nothing. What happened to Woodward at WaPo after that nothing……
The Real Mystery Surrounding Bob Woodward: Why Len Downie Believes Him
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..11320.html
Damage control, yes; it may be seeing a money-maker slipping temporarily through their gloved fingers. But I think the Post is beyond embarrassment.
That’s true. They haven’t worked out all the details of the menu.
Ya know, if WaPo was a REAL newspaper, the publisher would be handing out pinkslips right and left and promising the readers a full cleanup and expose.
This being the WaPo, I expect the idea CAME from the publisher.
Boxturtle (It’s things like this that cause me to believe that newspapers DESERVE to die)
from the flyer: “Spirited? Yes. Confrontational? No. The relaxed setting in the home of Katharine Weymouth assures it.”
Geez. We will now have a full page article about how WaPo editorial decisions are independent from the publisher and the business side.
Boxturtle (As soon as said publisher can order one)
Who is katharine Weymouth? Is she married to a Republican hack(like Howie Kurtz is)? Also, does the WaPo advertising that they are selling access to the Obama WH gonna go over well with Obama? Methinks, Rahm is going to have a nice little talk with Don Graham soon.
Publisher/CEO of the Post and granddaughter of Katherine Graham.
Daughter of Lally Weymouth and niece of Tina Weymouth (of the Talking Heads).
WaPo = Whore and Prostitute organization
If there was any integrity in the newsroom they would resign enmasse.
Just saw this at TP and said to myself, “O please let it be so!” What was that old line? This changes everything?
Off to read.
‘off-the-record’ so we can’t tell who the congress peeps are. worser and worser.
Suggested edit:
Perhaps someone could ask WH Press Secretary Gibbs about it.
Paging Nico . . .
Or Helen Thomas
Ironically, considering how the WaPo slams Obama from the right (the only reason they dumped Froomkin was because he was undercutting them with reality; he slammed Obama for doing things Fred Hiatt liked), I seriously doubt this would have stopped or even stemmed the Obama-hate that issues forth from Hiatt, Krauthammer, and the rest of the WaPo crew.
We have speculated for a long while that something was amiss — that the editorial boards of papers such as the WaPo were tending to slant the news. Maybe this is an actual confirmation of something that has been happening for a long while…
Regardless, it is a sad day…
Hmm…this event is scheduled for later this month. Which means that any congresscritters would already have confirmed. Many congresscritters keep their planned events on their website, wonder how quickly staffers can pull them down?
Boxturtle (WH staff would be more difficult to trace)
I wonder for those prices if it is for the whole night or just for a couple of tricks!
707!
Appears to be nothing more than a modern adaptation of Kitty Graham’s ’50’s through ’90’s Georgetown parties. Same power brokering concept. Same WaPo intel focus. Recently detailed in the Georgetown Ladies Social Club.
“http://www.amazon.com/Georgetown-Ladies-Social-Club-Politics/dp/0743428560
If you consider charging $25K and up to walk in the door, yeah, there’s nothing different.
This is the best news since the disclosure of that gang of generals crawling all over the networks. How good is this news? It’s as good as the firing of Dan Froomkin!
Just call it “Postgate,” or some other name of that kind.
It’s about the $54 million hit, I’m sure of it. The Grahams and Weymouths can no more endure the loss of standing than the loss of a fortune. They’ve been at the top of Washington since Eugene Meyer’s time, in the ’20’s and ’30’s, if I’m not mistaken.
And now the meanest redneck from Kansas can have a place at their table, provided he pays cash upfront. He’ll sit at that table across from Jim Lehrer. Lehrer comes from Texas, so the redneck will feel right at home.
Downhome billionaires, huddling together for warmth in a cold time.
Does warren Buffet still own part of the WAPO?
Probably. There is no way he’s ever selling it. Not while he’s alive. He only owns Class B stock(The Graham’s still own most of the Class A).
Thanks. I was just wondering if he might be a worthy pressure point of some sort.
The rumor around the salons of Washington is that Warren Buffett and Katherine Graham had a “thing.” It would not surprise me if he promised her he would look after the paper nor would it surprise me that he is horrified at the turn the paper has taken.
Berkshire Hathaway’s 13F, filed 5/31 for the first quarter of 2009, shows Berkshire Hathaway continuing to hold 1,727,765 shares of WPO [Washington Post stock].
The number of shares is unchanged from 12/31/08, but the value of those shares has dropped: from approx. $420/share on 12/31 to $343/share now.
Also, a year ago WPO was @ 650/share. In November 07, it was @ $850.
I wish Warren didn’t have such “fond memories” of Katherine Graham and was thinking with his head, rather than his . . . . well, head.
Haven’t looked but I wonder what health care-related holdings Berkshire Hathaway currently possesses, and whether those holdings are up/down/flat…
Were they expecting to recoup losses in value of B-H with their lobbying-via-newspaper efforts?
Speaking of lobbying, I wonder what constitutes lobbying effort which must be reported to the U.S. Senate?
EW, I think they don’t even care about “objectivity;” all they really care about is access. The most important thing to them is to be part of the “in” crowd. There are the “cogniscenti”(sp?) and then there are the great unwashed masses, in their world view.
Actually, they may be more afraid of losing access.
Bob from HI currently in CA
BINGO! And the staffers/congresscritters are afraid of losing a friendly ear. They’ll work this out.
Boxturtle (Mutual self-interest is a powerful force)
We’ve long known they were
whoresa propaganda service. But now they’ve admitted it and named their price. Oh happy day!I’d love to hear Helen Thomas’s opinion on this sorry state of affairs.
EW, do we know if this is the first event of this kind or has WaProstitute been doing this for awhile now? I would love to know how much cleavage, I mean coverage, has been paid for and for how long…
phred,
As Citizen92 wrote @17, this has been going on for a long time. The only difference is the blatant commercialization of it.
Bob from HI currently in CA
I’m with Peterr on this one, there is a world of difference when there is money involved. $25k-$250k is serious prostitution as opposed to a little roll in the hay with the cute guy you’ve got a crush on.
What does it say about our “independent” press when a lobbyist is more ethical than a newspaper?
ot
a while back I found it damn interesting that the F.B.I. was trying to dig around into Jack Anderson’s files
The F.B.I. says the dispute over the papers, which await cataloging at George Washington University here, is a simple matter of law.
“It’s been determined that among the papers there are a number of classified U.S. government documents,” said Bill Carter, an F.B.I. spokesman. “Under the law, no private person may possess classified documents that were illegally provided to them. These documents remain the property of the government.”
The standoff, which appears to have begun with an F.B.I. effort to find evidence for the criminal case against two pro-Israel lobbyists, has quickly hardened into a new test of the Bush administration’s protection of government secrets and journalists’ ability to report on them.
F.B.I. agents are investigating several leaks of classified information, including details of domestic eavesdropping by the National Security Agency and the secret overseas jails for terror suspects run by the C.I.A.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04…..38;emc=rss
Did the FBI put the same amount of energy and effort into finding out who outed Valerie Plame?
Thus are entrails turned into engravings on the finest parchment.
Dean Baker, from Washington Post (a.k.a. Fox on 15th) Starts Evaluating Political Arguments for Substance:
And of course, today’s news raises the possibility that even that non-supportiveness was just positioning for the real business of the enterprise.
My disgust with these phonies, especially Broder and Woodward seems to be insufficient. The names I have called these corporate lackeys in the past needs updating. Therefore I can in good conscience call WaPo, and Cokie Roberts and Kurtz and Cohen, neo-con crack whores for the New Goldman Sachs World Order.
My, my, that’ll keep you busy!
Of course, a lot of abbreviations suggest themselves …
You probably already saw this, but just in case:
Rolling Stone expose: Goldman Sachs behind every market crash since 1920s
“Goldman Sachs has played a crucial role in creating every market bubble since the 1920s — and has profited from not only on the bubbles, but from the crash that followed as well, says a new expose in Rolling Stone magazine.
“An article in the July 9-23 issue of the magazine, written by Matt Taibbi, lists five asset bubbles that the 140-year-old investment bank helped create — and one that Taibbi asserts the firm is currently working to make happen.”
http://rawstory.com/blog/2009/…..nce-1920s/
I agree with Taibbi that GS deliberately wrecked the economy, including
The WaPo also covers up for the Bilderbergers, international globalists and bankers who secretly meet yearly. This year they are preparing a world wide depression. Unfortunately, Obama Administration officials are collaborating with them. We will get one of two choices of economic depression. One choice is definitely The New World Order. Less national soverignty makes it easier for global domination by multinational corprations.
Nothing would surprise any of us about the wapoo at this point in time. They could have saved themselves all the outrage from the left blogosphere and waited to fire Froomkin…….like as not, he’d have quit when he found out about this……[words fail].
wigwam @ 25 –
Good thing I read the thread first; otherwise I’d owe ya a beverage. *g*
this is my favorite part from the flyer: “An exclusive opportunity to participate in the health-care reform debate among the select few who will actually get it done.” (emph mine)
We should call up the WAPO subscription line and ask for the “$25,000 Special”, where you actually get a seat at the damn table.
(and for that money better be a velvet smoking jacket with personalized monogram in the gift bag)
OT – From the ACLU, here’s yesterday’s “excuses” (2 page PDF) from the DOJ about not making the deadline to produce the CIA IG’s Special Report.
And here’s (3 page PDF) the ACLU’s “earlier in the day” slapdown of the DOJ for “the government’s unilateral decision to indefinitely extend its Court-ordered deadline”.
More Updates from The Post: the Publisher has now pulled the plug.
I’m trying to figure out under what circumstances this arrangement was deemed worthy of exploring in the first place.
*sigh*
I guess that’s why I’m not a TradMed reporter/editor/publisher.
The damage is done. Ain’t no putting the cork back on this one.
Aforkin’men! We need a replacement name for “wapoo” to more accurately describe its ‘ho status.
Gee I wonder if anybody can invite people to shindigs at her house.
I just hate it when my fliers fly away so fast. But they do not represent what the WaPo neo-cons are trying to do…which is? 1) Get money from lobbyists? 2) Stop Universal Health Care? 3) Share ideas with Dee Cee’s most brilliant minds? It is difficult to say.
But this does not “impugn” the WaPo’s newsroom. These liars have impugned themselves already with their false narratives of the criminal Bushie Oil Wars.
That paragraph is just ripe for deconstruction. Every single sentence.
As usual, it would be funny if it weren’t so utterly disgusting.
Huh. So what exactly were you “attempting to do” Katharine? Perhaps you could clarify for us precisely what your noble intentions were…
Translation: We’ll be a little more careful in the future with the wording of our invitations. You betcha.
As Perry Mason would say: this assumes a fact not in evidence.
As ham-handed as this flier was, I would be surprised if the WaPo Salons had already booked administration and Congressional staff/principals as guests. But it would be nice to know who (if anyone) had accepted.
What is curious to me is what about Washington today makes this kind of organized tete-a-tete necessary? Don’t they all go to cocktail weenie parties anyway? Sounds like some folks are not getting access to some folks.
*Someone* has to host those cocktail weenie parties.
Bob from HI
Sounds like some folks are broke. Since this attempt has failed (if we can believe what they’re saying now), wonder what they’ll do to get the big bucks they so badly need.
The WaPoop is just admitting what’s been clear for years. The Post, with a few exceptions occasionally plopped on page one or page A17, is a paid lobbyist for the establishment. As regards its specific role in matching lobbyists with their chosen representative, it’s fulfilling the well-established role of DC Madame.
As for elected representatives that allow their “services” to be sold to lobbyists, laundered by the WaPoop, they’re admitting membership in the oldest service organization on earth. It would be more honest if they posed behind a shop window in Amsterdam; they’d get free medical care there, too.
This is not an extension of legitimate news gathering. Nor is it simply holding conferences for those interested in special and timely topics. It’s a DC insider’s game of craps with loaded dice. In a mini-me version of Wall Street’s derivatives scandals, it is making direct conflicts of interest a money making subsidiary that promises to devour the impartial gathering and dissemination of news.
News organizations should demand that the Post withdraw from “newspaper” organizations. Whatever it once was, it is no longer.
Has anyone clued Dana Milbank in to the conspiracy by the Obama administration and a major paper? Seems like the paper was going to take 5 and 6 figure payoffs from people in order for them to have an opportunity to Obama officials questions.
I’m waiting to see the size of the file.
A note on vetting.
Sometimes you go look at a horse and it looks really good but its a lot of money and so you have blood drawn and xrays taken and maybe have it scoped and do a lot of things to try to reveal the hidden defects. And you need a real vet for that.
Other times you go and look at a horse and it is wildly uneven, one leg twice the size of the others, a hock blown out, a knee with a chip that could be used to carve out a full sized replica of the Statue of Liberty, front feet and it dazedly wanders in staggering circles no matter where it is pointed. You don’t really spend money on the pro to come out and tell you “that’s trouble”
Could we perhaps ask Congress for law showing the figure ($) which the publication was remunerated to publish the information stated in an article. This could be argued in the same way of food labeling or truth in advertising laws were approached. Consumers need to know where this crap is coming from before they decide to “consume” it.
Rachel and Keef picked a piss-poor week to go on holiday. :-(((
Comment from Ken Silverstein, citing the same Politico advert:
Answer: Nope.
OT
Even when the AIPAC case goes away, it won’t go away
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/sp…..ankli.html
I didn’t know Franklin’s sentence got suspended? Anyway – he says someone wanted to make him go away forever. Can’t name who, bc it is under seal. Hmm.
I suppose it’s time to keep a running list of Congresscritters who add themselves to the WaPoop’s stable of “presenters” in exchange for free hay.
Okay, I’ll take two ‘impartial centers’ on rye, with extra mustard and relish on the side.
To go.
Pretty swift for karma, isn’t it? Doesn’t that usually take lifetimes to hash itself out? But sweet? Mmmmm.
Didn’t Howard Kurz break a story about David Bradley and The Atlantic Magazine holding salons for the high and mighty where people like Rahm Emmanuel, the King of Jordan, Maureen Dowd and David Brooks would mingle over fancy dinners at the Watergate to discuss the pressing issues of the day? http://www.washingtonpost.com/…..00891.html
I wonder whether The Atlantic had “underwriting” participants as well or whether Howard Kurtz and his crowd just came up with a profitable twist on the salon concept? Because The Atlantic is losing money hand over fist just like the Post is.
Continuing in the humor vein:
http://tinyurl.com/nb4r49
Thanks Mad Dog. That’s what I was wondering about yesterday – it’s pretty damn disingenuous to wheedle extensions out of the other side that are presented as consent extensions and then go back to the court and allege you are asking for your first extension. I was thinking that there was no way the ACLU was consenting again after bending over backwards for gov earlier.
Then to top if off by asking for the extension on the due date and not even making an effort to get it on Monday – pretty dismissive of the court.
Charles Kaiser also has an excellent take down of Weymouth’s decision and its meaning for her newspaper:
EW “In other words, what is clear from this is that the WaPo doesn’t give a shit about neutrality, they care only about an illusion of “objectivity.”
Has it really ever been any different at the WaPo? Oh yeah we know Woodward and Bernstein, Woodward and Bernstein.
My first guess would be Rahm & Holy Joe.