Post Executive Editor: Froomkin Flap Is About Pleasing the White House
Post Executive Editor: Froomkin Flap Is About Pleasing the White House
Over the weekend, Washington Post ombudsman Deborah Howell wrote that Post reporters are upset with Dan Froomkin because they think the title of his column confuses readers:
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.
But Howell’s column didn’t offer the full story. In an interview today, Post executive editor Leonard Downie Jr. made clear that the top concern of the paper’s editorial team wasn’t regular readers after all — it was the Bush administration:
We want to make sure people in the [Bush] administration know that our news coverage by White House reporters is separate from what appears in Froomkin’s column because it contains opinion. And that readers of the Web site understand that, too.
The White House knows exactly who is doing political reporting for the Washington Post. The real message Post editors are sending here is that they don’t approve of Froomkin’s content, and that’s a different story altogether.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
God, it must be hard work carrying all that water… Give that man a medal of freedom. Yer doin’ a heckuva job, Downie…
December 13th, 2005 at 6:09 pmExpect a Van de Hei moment very, very soon. “That’s not what I meant…”
December 13th, 2005 at 6:15 pmBasically, all White House reporters are access sluts. Can you recall a single interesting story about a White House that ever came from a member of the WH Press Corps? They are whores, that’s their job, and pleasing the White House is what they do.
No wonder they are angry at Froomkin – the White House is probably pissed at the Post WH reporters for Froomkin’s column and the WH is putting the screws on the Post reporters. All that cushy access to powerful being frustrated by honest-to-god reporting.
December 13th, 2005 at 6:17 pmNothing like a good old fashion American flip flop.
December 13th, 2005 at 6:20 pmSo the truth comes out. John Harris (WaPo political editor) wasn’t concerned about journalistic purity, he was concerned about pleasing his principal clients at the WhiteHouse. WHAT A JERK!
December 13th, 2005 at 6:40 pm[...] The executive editor of the Washington Post, Leonard Downie Jr. has now made it clear that the crackdown on Dan Froomkin (crime: alleging that the media should hold the press accountable) is just another episode of the media changing it’s coverage in order to appease the Bush administration. How far will these guys go? It’s amazing that the same newspaper that valiantly published the Pentagon Papers thirty-four years ago is up in arms over a newspaper column that dares to further the idea of journalism. [...]
December 13th, 2005 at 6:45 pmThat’s exactly why newspaper readership is rapidly declining.
WE CANNOT TRUST THE CORPORATE MEDIA.
December 13th, 2005 at 7:49 pmthere is only one response to the wapo admission– boycott. Total and complete boycott. Remember that the right wing nuttery is allready staying away from wapo because they have bought into the garbage that they are being taught.
December 13th, 2005 at 7:50 pmNow, if it were possible to get the progressive members of the society to stop purchasing, advertising or visiting their site, either they will be forced to reexamine their position or they will go under. Sure, I know that I will be considered out of my mind but all I would love to see is an alternative method of expression open to us “liberal” folks.
Or, maybe we should just fall in line and stop caring about this once great country.
Pathetic. We have them, Judie Miller, and the rest of the MSM to thank for being attached to the teet of Ari Fleischer and now Scott (I never tell a lie, trust me!) Mcllellen….crooks and liars and no independent media willing to do anything more than suck up.
December 13th, 2005 at 7:52 pmSo tell us what it is please. Here is the ultimate ironic kiss of death for a newspaper,
December 13th, 2005 at 7:53 pmthe appeasement to the executive office for exclusive recogning . Can’t the Post just say, Hey he’s family and he’s not armed, so hear him out. Does the Post think the Blogosphere is going to turn into Escape from The Ny Times or something like that?
Quick better regulate this . Oh but don’t worry the GOP, is at the helm. Is this an apology for something from the Post to the White House?
Amazing that they gave away the whole
December 13th, 2005 at 8:35 pmgame here.
Knew it was true, but it gets pretty hard
to deny now.
Fits right in with the Booby incident.
BTW, why does he still have a job there?
Oh, that’s right, because the WHOLE paper
December 13th, 2005 at 8:37 pmis a “court stenographer”.
Misplaced Pat; Helen Thomas. But, yer probably right it’s not a rule without an exception.
December 13th, 2005 at 8:43 pmYou know that the administraion knows that everybody knows that the Main Stream Media is a dyed in the wool propaganda machine for the far right politicos here and abroad. I guess it isn’t a conspiracy anymore now that everyone knows the score.
The media will never tell who the rest of the conspirators are now. Maybe their ID will come out after it becomes acceptable to undermine society.
December 13th, 2005 at 8:49 pmThat’s exactly why newspaper readership is rapidly declining.
WE CANNOT TRUST THE CORPORATE MEDIA.
Comment by War4Sale
Newspaper subscriptions are failing for two reasons; the internet and the liberal bias that is endemic in the big city papers. Period. You can trust all but a few of the papers to print the liberal line. Period. Exclamation point.
December 13th, 2005 at 9:13 pmRepublicans in the Senate flip-flop on whether every nominee deserves an up or down vote – on one hand they were for it, but when extremist Republican activists soured on Harriet Miers, they decided they were against it. Now that the rightwing is popping Champagne corks for Samuel Alito, they are for it once again.
javascript:ol(’http://www.democrats.org/alitoletters’);
Comment by nofreedom!
Meyers never got far enough in the nomination process to even be considered in the Senate. You like “advise and consent” only when it suits you. Sit back and shut up, we’ll tell you when it’s your turn to pick Supreme Court Judges….yeah…make yourself real comfortable for the next twenty years or so….loser.
December 13th, 2005 at 9:21 pmWhen a newspaper bases its coverage on what the covered think of that coverage, there is no free press. Does WaPo management not know this?
December 13th, 2005 at 9:33 pmMeyers never got far enough in the nomination process to even be considered in the Senate. You like “advise and consent†only when it suits you. Sit back and shut up, we’ll tell you when it’s your turn to pick Supreme Court Judges….yeah…make yourself real comfortable for the next twenty years or so….loser.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 13, 2005 @ 9:21 pm
Oh, if only the supreme court picked the nominees. That’s the only plaxce your radical wingnuts will be in government for the next 20 years. Have you thought about moving to another country, since this one is far too liberal for you? Perhaps Germany in 1938 would suit you.
December 13th, 2005 at 9:44 pmDANIEL IN THE WRITERS DEN
DANIEL UPSET THE RULERS of the kingdom and now Froomkin finds himself among the lions. Or the hyenas. Or the high and mighty political writers at the Washington Post. The writers may be high and might be mighty sorry
December 13th, 2005 at 9:58 pmNewspaper subscriptions are failing for two reasons; the internet and the liberal bias that is endemic in the big city papers. Period. You can trust all but a few of the papers to print the liberal line. Period. Exclamation point.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — December 13, 2005
LOL! That’s funny! Endemic. An interestingly ironic choice of expression. It says alot about where your sick mind is. I think it’s endemic of living in the barnyard with your animal lovers.
Main Entry: 1en·dem·ic
Pronunciation: en-’de-mik, in-
Function: adjective
Etymology: French endémique, from endémie endemic disease, from Greek endEmia action of dwelling, from endEmos endemic, from en in + dEmos people, populace — more at DEMAGOGUE
1 a : belonging or native to a particular people or country b : characteristic of or prevalent in a particular field, area, or environment
2 : restricted or peculiar to a locality or region
synonym see NATIVE
More at dem·a·gogue
Variant(s): or dem·a·gog /’de-m&-”gäg/
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek dEmagOgos, from dEmos people (perhaps akin to Greek daiesthai to divide) + agOgos leading, from agein to lead — more at TIDE, AGENT
1 : a leader who makes use of popular prejudices and false claims and promises in order to gain power
2 : a leader championing the cause of the common people in ancient times
Main Entry: 1na·tive
Pronunciation: ‘nA-tiv
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English natif, from Middle French, from Latin nativus, from natus, past participle of nasci to be born — more at NATION
1 : INBORN, INNATE
2 : belonging to a particular place by birth
3 archaic : closely related
4 : belonging to or associated with one by birth
5 : NATURAL, NORMAL
6 a : grown, produced, or originating in a particular place or in the vicinity : LOCAL b : living or growing naturally in a particular region : INDIGENOUS
7 : SIMPLE, UNAFFECTED
8 a : constituting the original substance or source b : found in nature especially in an unadulterated form
9 chiefly Australian : having a usually superficial resemblance to a specified English plant or animal
- na·tive·ly adverb
- na·tive·ness noun
synonyms NATIVE, INDIGENOUS, ENDEMIC, ABORIGINAL mean belonging to a locality. NATIVE implies birth or origin in a place or region and may suggest compatibility with it . INDIGENOUS applies to species or races and adds to NATIVE the implication of not having been introduced from elsewhere . ENDEMIC implies being peculiar to a region . ABORIGINAL implies having no known race preceding in occupancy of the region .
You are fvcked and there isn’t a damn thing you can do about it, except for blow up some more federal buildings. Good luck with that, winger!
December 13th, 2005 at 9:59 pm
December 13th, 2005 at 10:06 pmOld Danny-boy better start locking for a new job,the editor will be looking for a reason to fire him just to please ROVE & HIS BUTT-BUDDY BUSH
You poor deluded wingnuts. You just don’t have any clue about the massive political realignment this country is going through, do you? To you guys, it’s going to be like living in FRANCE! Leave now! runaway! LMAO!
December 13th, 2005 at 10:40 pm
So much complaining about nothing at all. They don’t want their readers and yes the White House to get the wrong impression and think that this Froomkin character is a Post White House reporter. There’s nothing wrong with that. His column should be labeled as what it is, opinion.
December 13th, 2005 at 10:55 pmI find it really funny that the White House is all of a sudden concerned with who is or isn’t a “reporter.” Must have something to do with that 38% approval rating.
December 13th, 2005 at 10:57 pmGee, I don’t remember the WH having problem
December 13th, 2005 at 11:17 pmwith “reporter” Jeff Gannon, I wonder why?
As for Froomkin, the WH is confused about him?
Are they really admitting they are THAT stupid?
I think not.
They just don’t like the truth, and they never
have.
The press should ALWAYS speak truth to power,
this spin crap has got to go, and the blogs
are going to do it.
I can see why WaPo is scared.
The “court stenographers” are being
exposed.
GOOD!
Just wait till they illegalize blogging in Patriot Act 2.
December 13th, 2005 at 11:27 pm“illegalize”?
Bush supporter?
December 13th, 2005 at 11:35 pm#34,
Hee. Good one.
December 13th, 2005 at 11:36 pmActually, it only sounds like a Bushism. It IS a word!
December 13th, 2005 at 11:39 pm#14,nofreedom,
December 14th, 2005 at 12:31 amI believe I saw the same news piece as you.
Years ago when the FBI infiltrated anti-Viet Nam war demonstrations, the public outrage about spying on American citizens was such that the practice was abandoned.
There is no outrage now that will have a similar effect. Anyone who objects to this government is subject to outrageous scrutiny and investigation, names go on the no-fly lists, and there is no end to what can and will be done with such lists.
Civil liberties are threatened today as never before (in my memory) and people are apathetic — it doesn’t affect them (now) and the practice lives on.
There is a poem called “The Hangman” by Maurice Ogden, which should be read by everyone as it applies today.
Kabuki by Bush
December 13, 2005
In “Bush says war killed 30,000 Iraqis†by Nedra Pickler present President Bush as a character in a Japanese movie called Rashomon: Bush want to be seen in a positive light while everyone else sees differently. Desperate to reverse his sinking approval rating, Bush attempts an unscripted presentation Kabuki-style, trying to come “clean†about the true estimation of Iraqi casualties. That the World Affairs Council of Philadelphia Bush dropped the minimum body count of 30,000, hoping that public will be content with. Unfortunately, no one brought up The Lancet, a prestigious British medical journal, who estimated that about 100,000 Iraqi civilians had been killed in Iraq since it was invaded by a United States-led coalition in March 2003. It’s no surprise that Bush’s figures are way off since he had appointed Karen Hughes, undersecretary of state, to dispel anti-American sentiment around the world; she’s good company with Condi Rice. His Iraqi government progress has also come into question; the Pentagon’s paid journalists and news reports. For his last Kabuki pass, Bush stated that if he knew what he knows now he would have still made the same decision to invade Iraq. Where’s the trapdoor lever when you need one.
December 14th, 2005 at 12:41 amIt’s a bit more complicated than that, but you are essentially correct. Froomkin does not cover the WH. He covers those who cover the WH and in this day and age, his reporting is more than opinion, it is reporting of the larger issue, the co-opting of our once somewhat free press by government.
read this.
December 14th, 2005 at 1:09 amHmmm, why are people concerned that Froomkin’s opinions be distinguished from facts? It seems to me that many people on this site get very upset with Fox news when it appears that they mix opinion with facts. In my mind, facts and opinions should be separate and distinguished, no matter who presents them.
December 14th, 2005 at 9:37 amI am a regular reader of Daniel Froomkin I found it incredulous to read that Washington Post reporters object to the title of his column.
It becomes painfully obvious that John Harris has no confidence in the intelligence of the Post’s readers to know (and you realize it very quickly if you didn’t) that unlike too many “journalistsâ€, Froomkin is not and has not been a White House mouthpiece.
It is interesting to note that since “journalists†are faced with a backlash of angry readers over being spoon-fed White House pablum, that the title of his column should now become their straw man. Perhaps since John Harris is so happy with Chris Cillizza, perhaps that indicates that Daniel Froomkin is obviously too liberal for Mr. Harris’ tastes. Perhaps “journalists†need to clean their own houses to regain credibility rather than turning on their own.
December 14th, 2005 at 11:18 amThe question is: did the White House threaten the POST with reduced access? Harris and Downie don’t look very good at all here.
December 14th, 2005 at 6:54 pm