A serious question: What's up at the Washington Post? [View All]

[blondeatlast]

Several stories in recent weeks that smack more of proapganda than actual reporting--the piece on Obama's religion (should that even be news?), apparently burying stories that support the current NIE (Media Matters link here: http://mediamatters.org/items/200609180007 ), possible deliberate obfuscation of the Valerie Plame affaiar (Media Matters: http://www.colorado.mediamatters.org/items/200511280006 ), that' just one story. And to top it all off, the shoddy, severely spun "torture briefing" story from yesterday--so full of holes a truck could drive through it.

I'm sure savvy DUers can come up with dozens more.

My point is this--good editors would not let some of these stories even be published; the Obama religion story and the "torture briefing" story are so full of gaping holes and spin that a decent editor would not risk the embarrassment of letting them go into print without severe re-editing--and in the latter case, some confirmation. there is NO named source as a witness to the story. Anyone who took high school journnalism wouldn't let that kind of thing pass.

I can't find any real dirt on editor Leonard Downie, Jr. but something just doesn't pass the smell test anymore, IMHO. Try to imagine Ben Bradlee letting that Obama story in his newspaper and see if you think like I do.

It seems lately it's more like the Washington Times than the once-great Post...