Rahm’s Greg Craig Campaign

/9 Comments/in , , /by

How many stories–transparently sourced to Rahm Emanuel and predicting Greg Craig’s demise–have to appear before people start asking why Rahm is so persistently targeting Craig? Today’s NYT story follows on at least three other stories of the same genre (one, two, three). And it hides Rahm’s tracks even less than the earlier examples from the genre. There’s the on the record quote from Rahm.

“The president believes he has done a very good job and continues to do a very good job,” Mr. Emanuel said. “The notion that you’re going to blame him is ridiculous. He didn’t create Guantánamo. He is trying to work within the system to meet the president’s goal.”

There’s the blame on Rahm for trimming Craig’s portfolio on high profile issues.

At moments, it has looked as if Mr. Craig’s authority has been trimmed back. Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, assigned Pete Rouse, a senior adviser with deep ties to Capitol Hill, to oversee Guantánamo issues.

Similarly, after Mr. Craig started the search that produced the Supreme Court nomination of Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Mr. Emanuel assigned the confirmation fight to Ronald A. Klain and Cynthia Hogan, aides to Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. with long experience handling judicial appointments.

In both instances, White House officials said that Mr. Craig remained involved but that it made sense to tap people with political backgrounds to manage political issues, particularly since Mr. Craig had so many other duties, like scrutinizing legislation, vetting appointees and selecting judges.

And there’s the description of Rahm’s juvenile taunts going back to the Lewinsky days.

He studied law at Yale with Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton and joined the Clinton White House in 1998 to fight impeachment. Longtime aides resented the newcomer. When the announcement of his appointment described Mr. Craig as the “quarterback” of the impeachment defense, some Clinton aides, including Mr. Emanuel, derisively referred to him as “QB.” (All these years later, Mr. Emanuel said he liked and respected Mr. Craig.)

Read more →

Wieners versus Coal Plants

/10 Comments/in /by

Teddy says just about everything that needs to be said about Howie Kurtz’s latest obsessive rantings about David Letterman’s wiener. But I wanted to add one thing.

Howie says the reason the press (meaning, Howie himself) has covered Letterman’s wiener obsessively and not Ensign’s is because the Ensign story lacks visuals.

The Ensign story is complicated and not very visual. Letterman is far more famous. So the comic is turned into media fodder and the officeholder largely stays under the radar.

Of course, Howie complaint that Ensign’s affair isn’t visual enough is partly an expression of Howie’s own lack of imagination. Set aside, for example, that this is Vegas, baby. Vegas?!?! Not visual enough for Howie!?!?!?!

Focus instead on the real consequences Ensign’s actions might have for people totally unrelated to Ensign and his mistress and his mistress’ husband. It’s possible, for example, that Nevada may get a coal plant that some in the state oppose because of the ethically and potentially legally challenged work Ensign had his cuckold do.

With NV Energy, for instance, Mr. Hampton spent the summer of 2008 strategizing with John Lopez, the senator’s chief of staff, about how Mr. Ensign could intervene with the Interior Department to get the coal-plant [environmental impact statement] completed, Mr. Hampton said.

In November 2008, Mr. Ensign wrote to the Interior Department secretary at the time, Dirk Kempthorne, restating his longstanding view that the project was good for Nevada and urging the agency to publish the report.

Mr. Hampton followed up the next month with an e-mail message to Mr. Lopez, still trying to get the report released. The delay “is really hurting Nevada,” he wrote.

Mr. Lopez responded the same day. “I have been pounding Interior and can’t figure why this hasn’t come out,” his e-mail message said. “I’ll call again today.”

Mr. Lopez asked Matthew C. Eames, the department’s director of Congressional affairs, to make inquiries. Mr. Eames, in an interview, said after that hearing repeatedly from Mr. Ensign’s office, he contacted half a dozen Interior Department officials in Nevada and Washington to urge them to issue the report.

Five days after the e-mail exchange between Mr. Hampton and Mr. Lopez — on Dec 17, 2008 — the environmental impact statement was signed. (NV Energy has since put the coal plant project on hold.)

Granted, the project is on hold. But if it goes forward, Ensign’s little wiener problem would bring the people of Nevada worse air, worse lungs, and environmental degradation.

Now I realize that Howie, sequestered in his affluent neighborhood in the Village, may not like to think about things like the damage coal plants do to the environment and to people’s health. But it is yet another example of the way that the Village’s obsessive rantings hurt real America.

Proof the WaPo’s Twit Policy Has Restored Its Credibility

/92 Comments/in , /by

On September 30, several days after news of the WaPo’s new Twitter policy came out, Howie Kurtz tweeted one of his last meta-tweets on the policy, calling for "discretion."

WP has no plans to monitor tweets as far as I know, so there’s no czar in charge. Grownups should just exercise a bit of discretion…

Three tweets later, Howie set off on an obsession the likes of which we haven’t seen since 1998.

Extortion aside, got to be embarrassing for Letterman to admit to sexual affairs with more than one member of his staff.

Three minutes later, Howie revealed that if a story is about infidelity, it must be about Bill Clinton.

How long before TV recycles Letterman’s jokes about Clinton and every other politician who’s had an affair? At least he went to the cops.

But don’t put it beyond Howie to meta-tweet about Letterman.

Weird: I tweeted, Anderson Cooper’s person saw it, seconds later I’m phoning in to CNN on the Letterman affair(s). Talk about Twitter power

Howie reflected an entire minute, then tweeted,

Good thing Obama went on Letterman before this came out. Would have been awwwk-ward.

Howie boasts that his new obsession is more important than the Olympics (or, though he seems blissfully unaware of it, burgeoning negotiations with Iran).

What Olympics? Just did GMA on the Letterman case. It was the lead story. Sex, lies, extortion: Nuthin’ but viewers.

The day the NYT publishes a blockbuster story showing that John Ensign was pushing legislation to keep his cuckold quiet, Howie still thinks Letterman’s scandal is more scandalous.

Prosecutors say CBS producer Joe Halderman cashed the $2-M check in the Letterman extortion plot. That doesn’t look good.

Later that day, Howie’s still apparently unaware that a Senator faces a far more serious sex scandal than Letterman. 

Just finished Letterman stories. Anything else going on in the world? How’d that Olympics thing turn out?

Howie, yucks it up!

Leno tweaks Dave: "If you came here to have sex with a talk show host, you’ve got the wrong studio." Hi-yo!

If the WaPo’s editors were unaware of Howie’s dangerous new obsession, they became aware of it on the 3rd, two days after the obsession first began.

My column on the fallout from Letterman’s Stupid Human Tricks http://tinyurl.com/ye6dg2c

And by "obsession," I do mean "obsession."

My column on the David Letterman fiasco and whether his "creepy" behavior will hurt him with his audience. http://bit.ly/1r9sDP Read more →

George Steph Wrings His Hands

/104 Comments/in , /by

George Stephanopoulos, clutching his pearls, wants to know why it was necessary for Alan Grayson to call out Republicans on the floor of the House for their stubborn defense of the status quo failed health care in this country (note, in his post, Steph uses Eric Cantor’s YouTube of this speech, which ought to tell you on whose behalf he decided to cover this).

Why Is This Necessary?

Rep. Alan Grayson , D-Fla., says GOP plan is for people to "die quickly." House Republicans are demanding an apology. Don’t they deserve one? Watch here: UPDATE: At Noon today. Rep. Tom Price plans to introduce a new resolution admonishing…

I’m going to pretend Steph is asking sincerely why this is necessary. 

Exhibit One: What Steph had to say about Joe Wilson’s outburst.

If you needed any more evidence that passions run high on health care and America’s partisan divide cuts deep, it came tonight.  When was the last time you heard a member of Congress (Joe Wilson of S.C.) call the President a liar during a joint session address? (Rahm Emanuel has already approached the GOP Congressional leadership and demanded an apology. John McCain has said Wilson should apologize, too. And just moments ago, Wilson bowed to the inevitable and apologized). For that matter, when was the last time you heard a President use the word “lie” in a joint session address? 

No mention of the fact that Wilson was the one lying here. Instead, an excuse for Wilson because "passions run high." No mention of Wilson’s lie–or those of his Republican colleagues–the following day, either (though, once again, Steph highlights what Eric Cantor wants out there). No mention of Wilson’s lie in Steph’s discussion of Wilson’s opponent’s financial bonanza for his outburst either.

Exhibit Two: George Steph’s "outrage" in response to much more incendiary comments from Republicans–such as when Mike Huckabee said that Democrats would have forced Teddy Kennedy to "go home to take pain pills and die." 

Mike Huckabee tossed a hand grenade into the debate over who’s politicizing Ted Kennedy’s death Thursday morning when he told his radio audience that under Obamacare, Kennedy would be told to "go home to take pain pills and die."

Which Democrat will toss it back first?

Read more →

Chuck Schumer to Bloggers: “Fuck You”

/111 Comments/in , /by

Jay Rosen first pointed me to the news that Chuck Schumer is aiming to declare all us DFH bloggers non-journalists before the law.

For citizen journalists, the federal shield law front was looking good for a while.  Although the House of Representatives version of the bill, passed in April, only offered a shield to professional bloggers, the Senate version didn’t differentiate between the pros and the amateurs.  So there was hope that amateur journalists might actually, eventually, get its protection.

No longer though.

Sadly, the Senate Judiciary Committee has followed the path of the House and opted to specify that only a "salaried employee . . . or independent contractor" will be able to invoke the shield, reports the Wall Street Journal’s Digits blog.  The amendment, offered by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D) of New York, limits the definition of a journalist to one who:

(iii) obtains the information sought while working as a salaried employee of, or independent contractor for, an entity—

(I) that disseminates information by print, broadcast, cable, satellite, mechanical, photographic, electronic, or other means; and

(II) that—

(aa) publishes a newspaper, book, magazine, or other periodical;

(bb) operates a radio or television broadcast station, network, cable system, or satellite carrier, or a channel or programming service for any such station, network, system, or carrier;

(cc) operates a programming service; or

(dd) operates a news agency or wire service . . . 

This language is in fact more restrictive than its House counterpart, which only limits the shield to those who gather or disseminate news "for a substantial portion of [their] livelihood or for substantial financial gain."  The Judiciary Committee’s "salaried employee . . . or independent contractor" language on its own would be sufficient to deprive most non-traditional journalists of protection.  But the requirement that the hosting entity both disseminate information by electronic means and operate a publishing, broadcasting, or news service of some kind ices it.

So to be a journalist in Chuck Schumer’s eyes, you have to both have a boss (at this point, you generous readers and Jane would count as my boss, but Jane doesn’t have a boss, for example) and that boss’ company must disseminate news on some other medium, in addition to the Toobz. Read more →

WaPo Tries to Silence Its Twits

/27 Comments/in , /by

Howard Kurtz’ plaintive Tweet was the first hint that the authorities were cracking down:

Under new WP guidelines on tweeting, I will now hold forth only on the weather and dessert recipes.

Then came OmbudAndy’s post on the new guidelines–which laid out some, but not all, of the new rules.

The new guidelines address the “perception problem” noted by Narisetti. A key section reads:

“When using these networks, nothing we do must call into question the impartiality of our news judgment. We never abandon the guidelines that govern the separation of news from opinion, the importance of fact and objectivity, the appropriate use of language and tone, and other hallmarks of our brand of journalism.”

Another section reads: “What you do on social networks should be presumed to be publicly available to anyone, even if you have created a private account. It is possible to use privacy controls online to limit access to sensitive information. But such controls are only a deterrent, not an absolute insulator. Reality is simple: If you don’t want something to be found online, don’t put it there.”

It continues: “Post journalists must refrain from writing, tweeting or posting anything – including photographs or video – that could be perceived as reflecting political racial, sexist, religious or other bias or favoritism that could be used to tarnish our journalistic credibility.”

Read his whole post for some background on the kind of "perception problems" driving the guidelines.

Finally, PaidContent posted all the guidelines (which cover only personal Twitter and Facebook accounts, not professional ones–those guidelines will come later). More interesting than the "perception problem" guidelines OmbudAndy highlighted are the corporatist ones.

When using social networking tools for reporting or for our personal lives, we must remember that Washington Post journalists are always Washington Post journalists. 

[snip]

Personal pages online are no place for the discussion of internal newsroom issues such as sourcing, reporting of stories, decisions to publish or not to publish, personnel matters and untoward personal or professional matters involving our colleagues. The same is true for opinions or information regarding any business activities of The Washington Post Company. Such pages and sites also should not be used to criticize competitors or those who take issue with our journalism or our journalists.

And, perhaps most amazing of all, where a newspaper implies that freedom of speech is a "privilege," not a right.

All Washington Post journalists relinquish some of the personal privileges of private citizens. 

Read more →

Al Punto Versus Fox News Sunday

/57 Comments/in /by

As you may have heard, President Obama is going to appear on five Sunday shows this Sunday (rumor has it that McCain is despondent to learn that he hasn’t actually been President for the last eight months).

That, by itself, is notable. But there’s another notable detail about Obama’s Sunday blitz. Here are the five shows on which Obama will appear:

  • CBS’ Face the Nation
  • NBC’s Meet the Press
  • ABC’s This Week
  • CNN’s State of the Union
  • Univision’s Al Punto

Note the last one: instead of rounding out the top five with Fox News Sunday, Obama is appearing on Univision’s Sunday show, Al Punto.

Now, this not the first time that Presidents have appeared on Univision: Clinton appeared on Univision five times, W was on six times, and Obama has done a couple of interviews with Univision as well.

But this is the first time a Obama is the first President who has appeared will appear on Al Punto (the show started in September 2007, at the same time as Univision was hosting a Presidential debate) [correction: Obama has been on before]. 

As such, it seems to me, it ought to focus some attention on Al Punto’s role in the Sunday line-up. And, as it turns out, the White House can justify blowing off Fox for Univision not just to reach out to Latinos rather than white racists. According to Univision’s corporate communications, Al Punto (531,000) does better than FNS (417,000) in the all-important 18-49 demographic (and has done so for the last 10 months), and it often beats CBS’ Face the Nation in that demo as well.

The white racists are in a tizzy crying that Obama is unfair in ignoring Fox.

[Joe "You Lie!"] Wilson, who was reprimanded this week by the House for his outburst at Obama last week, said that by excluding Fox, the president was not being fair.

“If people are going to be on the Sunday talk shows, they should be on all of them,” Wilson said.

Wilson, incidentally, appeared on “Fox News Sunday” last week, but not on any of the other Sunday shows.

Rep. Pete Sessions (Texas), chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, told The Hill that Obama has “handpicked” his audience.

“I think that Fox News would ask some realistic questions that members of Congress are asked and the American public is aaaasking. And he’s the one who’s choosing not to take part in that,” Sessions said on Wednesday.

But what’s really going on is that Obama has chosen to appear on the more popular show. Read more →

WaPo Happy, Two: Lalalalalala! I Can’t Hear You!

/28 Comments/in /by

As a follow-up to this post, here is WaPo Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli’s approach to addressing the WaPo’s $143 million hemorrhage thus far this year.

Brauchli on whether he should have to explain his paper’s journalism to–among others–readers:

I don’t think it’s necessary for us to lay out all of the processes in the newspaper to make decisions,” he snapped. “Newspapers spend way too much time explaining themselves.” He went on: “Too many people call our newsroom. There are endless queries on our journalism these days. I think it’s better for us to focus on producing journalism than on our process.”

Brauchli on how–after ignoring those too many people calling the newsroom–the WaPo will determine what readers want:

Story lengths in the magazine were often too long, subjects were sometimes remote, and tenor wasn’t always consistent with what other editors and I believe our readers want in a Sunday magazine.

That ought to work out splendidly.

Happy Weymouth, Happy WaPo

/49 Comments/in /by

The woman who brought us the Pay2Play Salons is also bringing us–or rather, bringing advertisers–nothing but happy stories.

At least that’s what I take away from this WaPo story, which works hard to deny that a story about a young woman cheerfully adjusting to body image issues after amputation was spiked because Katharine Weymouth had decreed that the WaPo Magazine needed to have happy stories. But the story reveals that Weymouth wasn’t just spiking one story, she was delivering nothing but happy stories for her advertisers.

Weymouth, publisher of The Post, told the story’s author, freelance journalist Matt Mendelsohn, at a brunch earlier this year that advertisers "wanted happier stories, not ‘depressing’ ones," Mendelsohn wrote in an online posting. His story was about a 26-year-old woman whose arms and legs had been amputated.

Weymouth said Monday night that any impact she had was "completely inadvertent, because I would never interfere in an editorial decision and I had no intention of interfering." She said that she had not even read Mendelsohn’s story, but that she had "used it as an example" with editors "of the kind of fare we should be moving away from."

The rest of the story features two editors describing a significant shift in direction.

Brauchli said the story was caught in a "big shift" at the Sunday magazine after its previous editor took early retirement this year and during a change in editorial emphasis.

[snip]

Sydney Trent, the magazine’s acting editor at the time, said she declined to run the story "because it was clear the newspaper wanted to move in a different direction.

But the best explanation for what that big shift is is away from stories about dwarves getting their legs lengthened and away from "overly long, overly narrow" stories. Or, alternately, that the WaPo has adopted, as a general policy, a happy-only policy.

In case you’re wondering, this story does not mention any discussion about quality.

Race and the Public Option

/53 Comments/in , , /by

MoDo has discovered that racists are upset they have a black President.

I’ve been loath to admit that the shrieking lunacy of the summer — the frantic efforts to paint our first black president as the Other, a foreigner, socialist, fascist, Marxist, racist, Commie, Nazi; a cad who would snuff old people; a snake who would indoctrinate kids — had much to do with race.

I tended to agree with some Obama advisers that Democratic presidents typically have provoked a frothing response from paranoids — from Father Coughlin against F.D.R. to Joe McCarthy against Truman to the John Birchers against J.F.K. and the vast right-wing conspiracy against Bill Clinton.

But Wilson’s shocking disrespect for the office of the president — no Democrat ever shouted “liar” at W. when he was hawking a fake case for war in Iraq — convinced me: Some people just can’t believe a black man is president and will never accept it.

Now, frankly, I think MoDo was partly right in agreeing with Obama advisors that Democratic President will always attract nuts. As Glenn Greenwald argued yesterday:

I have very mixed feelings about the protests of conservatives such as David Frum or Andrew Sullivan that the conservative movement has been supposedly "hijacked" by extremists and crazies.  On the one hand, this is true.  But when was it different?  Rush Limbaugh didn’t just magically appear in the last twelve months.  He — along with people like James Dobson, Pat Robertson, Bill Kristol and Jesse Helms — have been leaders of that party for decades.  Republicans spent the 1990s wallowing in Ken Starr’s sex report, "Angry White Male" militias, black U.N. helicopters, Vince Foster’s murder, Clinton’s Mena drug runway, Monica’s semen-stained dress, Hillary’s lesbianism, "wag the dog" theories, and all sorts of efforts to personally humiliate Clinton and destroy the legitimacy of his presidency using the most paranoid, reality-detached, and scurrilous attacks.  And the crazed conspiracy-mongers in that movement became even more prominent during the Bush years.  Frum himself — now parading around as the Serious Adult conservative — wrote, along with uber-extremist Richard Perle, one of the most deranged and reality-detached books of the last two decades, and before that, celebrated George W. Bush, his former boss, as "The Right Man."

It’s also why I am extremely unpersuaded by the prevailing media narrative that the Right is suddenly enthralled to its rambunctions and extremist elements and is treating Obama in some sort of unique or unprecedented way.  Read more →