You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Greenwald: Newsweek's Holly Bailey with a moment of unintended candor [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 10:58 AM
Original message
Greenwald: Newsweek's Holly Bailey with a moment of unintended candor
Advertisements [?]
Bravo for Glenn for holding most of these 'journalists' in such contempt. So many deserve it.


http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/26/anonymity/

Newsweek's Holly Bailey with a moment of unintended candor


It's important to praise the members of the establishment media who candidly acknowledge that journalism as they practice it has no real standards. They are much more honest than the ones who continue to maintain the pompous pretense that establishment "journalism" is some sort of elevated and noble profession governed by a complex set of ethical rules for ensuring accuracy and transparency.

In a frivolous little fluff piece about Barack Obama's struggles to adjust to the loss of privacy and personal freedom as President, Newsweek's Holly Bailey this week quotes multiple anonymous sources -- "a close Obama friend"; "an aide"; "an aide"; "one senior Obama aide" -- to do nothing other than explain what a down-to-earth guy Barack is and how he longs for the days when he could take early evening strolls with his kids. Bailey -- Newsweek's White House correspondent who famously swung on John McCain's tree tire while swilling Chardonnay at the McCains' weekend party for their reporter-fans -- deserves credit, in some perverse sort of way, because she can't even bring herself to pretend any longer that there are any standards that govern when anonymity will be granted:

After {Obama} said goodbye to his last guest, Chinese President Hu Jintao, Obama walked to the back door and peered out. "Come on," he called to two of his closest aides, senior adviser David Axelrod and Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. "Let's go take a walk."

The Secret Service agents on duty "freaked," in the words of one senior Obama aide who recounted the story (and who, like others quoted in this story, asked for anonymity for the usual reasons).


Like The Washington Post -- which, in the wake of controversies over Iraq reporting, self-glorifyingly trumpeted its new Serious, highly restrictive anonymity policy yet now shamelessly publishes glorifying profiles of a key torture advocate based on nothing but the justifying claims of his anonymous "friends" -- Newsweek previously vowed to use anonymity far more sparingly in the wake of its own reporting scandal. Yet here is one of its star "political reporters" casually and indiscriminately granting anonymity to every politically connected person who requests it, and she just brazenly acknowledges that she has no justification for that other than what she dismissively refers to as "the usual reasons." The fact that this article is frivolous and gossipy makes the reckless grant of anonymity far worse, not better, as it illustrates how indiscriminately they now use it.

These are just gossip rag techniques. Disseminating personality chatter from unnamed "friends" is a staple of National Enquirer and People . . . as well as the "political reporting" of The Washington Post, Newsweek, and Politico. At least the former don't pretend to be anything other than what they are.

* * * * *
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC