WaPo has a new Rove stenographer; Froomkin responds to her.

[understandinglife]

Washington Post <cough>stupid shill<cough> "ombudsman," Deborah Howell, published trash talk about Dan Froomkin in an article on Sunday (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/10/AR2005121000938.html).

Froomkin responds:

In Sunday’s Washington Post, the paper’s new ombudsman, Deborah Howell, writes that The Post’s political reporters don’t like my column. She states that the column is "highly opinionated and liberal" and concludes that it should no longer bear the name "White House Briefing," because the title may lead some readers to think it is the work of the paper’s reporting staff. Such a belief, Post political editor John Harris told her, dilutes the credibility of the newspaper.

Regular readers know that my column is first and foremost a daily anthology of works by other journalists and bloggers. When my voice emerges, it is often to provide context for those writings and spot emerging themes. Sometimes I do some original reporting, and sometimes I share my insights. The omnipresent links make it easy for readers to assess my credibility.

There is undeniably a certain irreverence to the column. But I do not advocate policy, liberal or otherwise. My agenda, such as it is, is accountability and transparency. I believe that the president of the United States, no matter what his party, should be subject to the most intense journalistic scrutiny imaginable. And he should be able to easily withstand that scrutiny. I was prepared to take the same approach with John Kerry, had he become president.

<clip>

The journalists who cover Washington and the White House should be holding the president accountable. When they do, I bear witness to their work. And the answer is for more of them to do so -- not for me to be dismissed as highly opinionated and liberal because I do.

Link to both his comments and a place where you can express yours (and I hope 1000s of you do):

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/washpostblog/2005/12/white_house_bri.html#comment-12039188

Among the first comments is a gem "Froomkin puts the rest of the paper to shame."

Jane Hamsher is eloquently blunt:

What the WaPo writers are viewing through their Technorati tags is only a tiny crumb of a rage that threatens to sweep them into irrelevance. If they care about the preservation of superstar journalists and the politics of access above all else they blind themselves to the sea change that is taking place in how information is exchanged.

Dan Froomkin is the future. They say they want to balance him out by adding a conservative voice? That's great, just what the Mighty Wurlitzer needs, another outlet. As I've said before, this isn't about right vs. left, it's about people on both sides who are sick of the machine. One step forward, six steps back. Outside the fucking box, that lot.

It won't be long before the WaPo honchos wish they'd sent Bob Woodward and his embarrassing apologies packing before he dragged them down into 8-track tape anachronism. I dare them to take a look at the bulk of the last year's offerings on the CIA leak and do anything other than groan. The reporting is execrable and the dot connection worse. They've handed the keys to the kingdom to the village idiots and they shouldn't be stunned when bloggers merely point that out.

More at the link:

http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/2005_12_01_firedoglake_archive.html#113442242607540843

Go for it ...


Peace.

[mod mom]

1. Shameful. They are now acting blatantly about their whoredom, just like

the Ohio rethugs are in the election arena.

:argh:

[AX10]

2. The Whorington Post is now being blatent in their whoring for *.

[ChowChowChow]

3. Jame Hamsher is a national treasure!

[understandinglife]

5. Most definitely! She and ReddHedd have created one of the most ...

... essential blogs on the net.


Peace.

[mattclearing]

4. Yeah, but they never bitch about that nut Richard Cohen.

Froomkin and Colby King are the only worthwhile columnists at the Post. Dionne has his moments. Everyone else is just horrible.

[understandinglife]

6. But, we do! And, that is one of the reasons Rove stenographer Howell ...

... launched the attack on Froomkin. The others are getting pummeled via their Technorati tags -- by us!


Peace.

[Garbo 2004]

7. If the WaPo's White House reporters did indeed have credibility, I fail to

see how Froomkin's column could detract from it. Except perhaps by letting a few uncomfortable truths into public view that the WaPo reporters neglected to report.

Guess the WaPo did its pre Iraq War coverage mea culpa because just like Judy Miller they were "fucking right?" uh huh. Woodward reportedly had to go to bat for Pincus just to get one of Pincus' articles published at all during that time. It was an article that went against the White House talking points and other WaPo reports by its oh so credible reporters who promulgated the WH party line. And even then it appeared buried in the paper.

Isn't the WaPo also afraid that Milbank's "Washington Sketch" column might be mistaken for actual objective reporting?

[Cocoa]

8. it's not just the ombudsman, it's the whole gang

Broder probably hates Froomkin the most because Froomkin makes Broder look like a chump.

[understandinglife]

9. "Broder probably hates Froomkin the most because Froomkin makes Broder ...

... look like a chump.

And, that's something Froomkin can do in his sleep!

I agree with you -- "it's the whole gang."


Peace.

[understandinglife]

10. Harris is, rightfully, getting hammered:

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/washpostblog/2005/12/john_harris_res.html#comments

Join the fun ....

And, Jane Hamsher reports on Fire in the Cat House:

http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/2005_12_01_firedoglake_archive.html#113451301953251801


Peace.