More Broccoli Soup from the WaPo
Media Matters notes that Marcus Brauchli offered–then withdrew–an offer to answer readers’ questions about the WaPo’s Pay2Play scandal.
Is Washington Post executive editor Marcus Brauchli laying the groundwork to duck questions about whether he was honest about his role in the Post’s access-for-cash scandal?
[snip]
Note that the formerly broad wording (Brauchli was going to take “questions about the newspaper and washingtonpost.com”) has now been narrowed (Brauchli will take “questions about The Post redesign.”)
Is that an effort to discourage questions about Brauchli’s honesty and other sticky subjects?
I’m guessing the answer to those question is “yes.”
But I also think it time to shift focus away from the inconsistent story of the WaPo’s Executive Editor to what his role says about the institution of the WaPo as a whole.
As I noted over the weekend, the WaPo put Brauchli himself in charge of its internal investigation aimed at “avoiding another episode that could damage the paper’s reputation.” But we now know that Brauchli was always a party to these discussions, up to and including making the salons off the record. They put the guy at the center of the scandal in charge of figuring out how to avoid such scandals in the future. And now they’re trotting out the same guy to do a chat that might have–but apparently will no longer–addressed these questions.
This is, by all appearances, an institutional whitewash, not just Brauchli’s inconsistent story. And we ought to be focusing on that fact.
Only thing I ever agreed with GHW Bush about, I don’t like Broccoli either! The Gray Lady and the WaPo are history, by instituting their own irrelevancy. You can’t choose sides, especially in advance, if you’re supposed to report the news.
I wouldn’t be surprised – not one bit – if the deepest implications of this scandal end-up being that the WaPo is nothing more than a Shell of a Newspaper – a Newspaper in Name Only – actually controlled by Propagandists within the Government, who call all the tunes wrt Writing, Editing and Publishing.
How else could they be the Voice of the Village?
I thought they did themselves in when they fired Froomkin, but no, it happened much earlier–perhaps they lost their classifieds (or perhaps when they turned A17 into the cemetery for their big stories).
A failed matriarchy.
“Does the Washington Post plan to further redesign their site to emphasize stories written as a result of off-the-record corporate fundraisers? Can we look forward to any special icons or formatting so as to find these stories easier?”
Brauchli Soup is obviously to be taken with a grain of salt.
Brauchli Soup is a bad as Hot Soup was.
Brauchli is, however, taking questions right now at the WaPo about their new redesign of the Post.
Glad that he’s got his priorities straight as far as acceptable questions: changes to capitalization of headlines — OK; new font — OK; pay2play at the WaPo — not OK.
I don’t see the problem. He is merely following in the footsteps of Phillip, Katherine and Donald Graham.
See Katherine the Great by Deborah Davis (recommended by another commenter here several months ago)
for the whole sordid mess.
the dude shoulda read his Shakespeare
you’d think a wordsmith would be familiar with that particular line …
Pls forgive me for being such a nit-picky old thing.
Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practise to deceive!
Sir Walter Scott, Marmion, Canto vi. Stanza 17.
Scottish author & novelist (1771 – 1832)
D’oh, you beat me to it. We even found the same site. Nice catch.
From today’s chat:
===========================
Rochester, NY: Obviously, you won’t take this question, but I’d like to ask: isn’t there a problem when the same reporters who were to be part of your health care “salon” are now essentially repeating insurance industry claims about the health care bill?
I’m referring specifically to Ceci Connolly. I write as a regular reader and fan of your paper — are you aware how much credibility you have lost as a result of the salons?
Marcus Brauchli: Actually, I will take this question, because it comes with a silly premise that needs knocking down.
First, there were no salon dinners. They were planned and they were canceled. Second, Ceci Connolly, who is an absolutely first-rate, independent-minded reporter, was simply asked who might be worth inviting to a roundtable discussion on healthcare. There is no reason she should be taken off of this story. Third, while we appreciate your visiting with us on this chat, you should read what we write. We have scrutinized the insurance industry’s claims about healthcare legislation extensively, including in a lengthy piece last week by Alec MacGillis. Finally, yes, I realize that the salon dinner episode was embarrassing and damaging to our credibility, but I would say to you: judge us by our journalism.
_______________________
Philly, Pa.: If you know a reporter has reported something about you which is inaccurate, are you not obligated to publicly correct the record?
I’m sorry, sir, but I lost all respect for you after reading the letter you sent to your former colleague. You knew that it was reported that you claimed to have no knowledge of the off-the-record promises, and you chose to allow that to stand. You scapegoated an employee, and misled the public. Of course, that version is being generous, and its every bit as likely that you just lied to the NYT’s reporter, hoping not to get caught.
You lied to your readers. You lied to your employees.
I hope your retirement is happy and fruitful, and I hope it starts very soon.
Marcus Brauchli: When these events were planned, we intended that the information from them would inform and shape our coverage, without attribution. That is not, under our rules, off the record.
They were later promoted as “off the record,” and I knew that before July 2.
As I have said repeatedly since then, I failed to reconcile the language and the intentions, which I should have done.
The notion that I lied to the New York Times “hoping not to get caught” is absurd.
=============================
You need to get that, in middle America, we only have a handful of places to turn to ever have a believable truth…you were one.
Well, that settles that question.
Bob in AZ
I got two things to say. No brocolli soup. One bourbon, one shot, and one beer.
Well, I screwed up the formatting in that comment. I’ll try again:
From today’s chat:
===============================
Rochester, NY: Obviously, you won’t take this question, but I’d like to ask: isn’t there a problem when the same reporters who were to be part of your health care “salon” are now essentially repeating insurance industry claims about the health care bill?
I’m referring specifically to Ceci Connolly. I write as a regular reader and fan of your paper — are you aware how much credibility you have lost as a result of the salons?
Marcus Brauchli: Actually, I will take this question, because it comes with a silly premise that needs knocking down.
First, there were no salon dinners. They were planned and they were canceled. Second, Ceci Connolly, who is an absolutely first-rate, independent-minded reporter, was simply asked who might be worth inviting to a roundtable discussion on healthcare. There is no reason she should be taken off of this story. Third, while we appreciate your visiting with us on this chat, you should read what we write. We have scrutinized the insurance industry’s claims about healthcare legislation extensively, including in a lengthy piece last week by Alec MacGillis. Finally, yes, I realize that the salon dinner episode was embarrassing and damaging to our credibility, but I would say to you: judge us by our journalism.
_______________________
Philly, Pa.: If you know a reporter has reported something about you which is inaccurate, are you not obligated to publicly correct the record?
I’m sorry, sir, but I lost all respect for you after reading the letter you sent to your former colleague. You knew that it was reported that you claimed to have no knowledge of the off-the-record promises, and you chose to allow that to stand. You scapegoated an employee, and misled the public. Of course, that version is being generous, and its every bit as likely that you just lied to the NYT’s reporter, hoping not to get caught.
You lied to your readers. You lied to your employees.
I hope your retirement is happy and fruitful, and I hope it starts very soon.
Marcus Brauchli: When these events were planned, we intended that the information from them would inform and shape our coverage, without attribution. That is not, under our rules, off the record.
They were later promoted as “off the record,” and I knew that before July 2.
As I have said repeatedly since then, I failed to reconcile the language and the intentions, which I should have done.
The notion that I lied to the New York Times “hoping not to get caught” is absurd.
==============================
Calling Qs silly is not a way to keep readers.
I screwed it up too. It’s One whiskey, one Scotch and one beer.
I’m doing the carpets, please forgive me.
George does.
When you’re done with your carpets can you help me clean my outdoor rugs so I can put them away for the season?
One Bourbon, One Scotch, One Beer
You could destroy Delaware with that recipe.
*G*
Thorough Good, though!
First, there were no salon dinners. They were planned and they were canceled.
Nothing to see here. Move along. ;)
Like many other rags, the Wapo and NYT are dying.
Only, maybe faster than other rags.
On the other hand, I’ve got a killer recipe for Cream Of Broccoli Soup.
One is heavy on cream and butter, the other is a light weight version and MUCH lower cal.
It’s winter, time for hearty soups, and creamed soups fit the bill!!!
Brauchli, however, is toast, and I don’t mean crostini. As is his rag.
Buh by. Don’t bug us no mo.
Mz. Wheeler, thanks for the post and way to point up FAIL when ya see it!!
*G*
On a related note, the NYT is planning cutbacks in the newsroom.
Gawker has the right take on this:
Bob in AZ
this is SO old washington.
brauchli is such a disingenuous corporate boor.
katherine wayman is such a disingenuous corporate boor.
the wapoop is such a predictable media bore.
has anything changed since — ?
Ha ha ha
MSNBC (with Cameron Hall) had Ceci Connolly on as a talking head ‘expert’ on the “public option” health care, without of course identifying her conflicts of interest.
And then Dr. Nancy had her on again with another WaPo reporter. Apparently something in the WaPo today (Public option gains support; CLEAR MAJORITY NOW BACKS PLAN. Americans still divided on overall packages, by Dan Balz and Jon Cohen.)
She’s talking a “modified” public option.
Bob in AZ