The Washington Post Just Declared War on The New York Times

[n2doc]

by CHARLES P. PIERCE
SEP 9, 2016


I don't think it is vastly overstating the case to say that, on the matter of whatever-the-hell-else is going on with Hillary Rodham Clinton's e-mails, The Washington Post just declared war on The New York Times.

In fact, Ms. Clinton's emails have endured much more scrutiny than an ordinary person's would have, and the criminal case against her was so thin that charging her would have been to treat her very differently. Ironically, even as the email issue consumed so much precious airtime, several pieces of news reported Wednesday should have taken some steam out of the story. First is a memo FBI Director James B. Comey sent to his staff explaining that the decision not to recommend charging Ms. Clinton was "not a cliff-hanger" and that people "chest-beating" and second-guessing the FBI do not know what they are talking about. Anyone who claims that Ms. Clinton should be in prison accuses, without evidence, the FBI of corruption or flagrant incompetence.

(And I hope that it escaped nobody's notice that this volley from the south coincided with another over-hyped NYT nothingburger in which various anonymous Chaffet…er…sources repeated something we'd already known for weeks. This is getting embarrassing.)

And I don't think it's speculating wildly to assume that the Post's expression of exasperation might have originated with a certain unassuming, never-would-know-he's-in-the-room hardass to whom shoddy journalism is a personal affront.

This should be great fun the rest of the way.

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a48468/washington-post-nytimes-clinton-email/

[elleng]

1. Oh GOOD,

let's watch the 'left' beating up the 'left!' JUST what the doctor ordered!

[truebluegreen]

19. Really? Major national newspapers are "the left"?

Where did you get that particular framing?

And you have a problem with shoddy reporting being called out?

[Wednesdays]

21. And stating it as "declaring war" is hyperbole

It's just a disagreement between two editors on this one issue, ferchrissakes.

[truebluegreen]

24. Do you read Charles Pierce?

Coiner of such monikers as "Princess Dumbass of the Northwoods," "the zombie-eyed granny starver from the state of Wisconsin," and "Governor Bat Boy" (I.e. Palin, Paul Ryan and Rick Scott). "Declaring war" is tame for him--although I have to say I agree with you in general. I'm tired of headlines claiming x destroys y, slams z, shames whoever, eviscerates somebody else, etc etc etc...but for me Charlie can say whatever he wants.

[Iliyah]

2. Well let's see what happens

[mcar]

3. Good

NYT's HRC coverage is execrable.

[UTUSN]

4. Will appreciate if somebody will decipher who is being referenced in the next-to-last sentence:

"... originated with a certain unassuming, never-would-know-he's-in-the-room hardass to whom shoddy journalism is a personal affront."

Let's see what I've got so far: for something to originate inside the WP, it would need to be from somebody inside the WP? Isn't the owner BEZOS?-- but he's not grounded in journalism, cancels out the "shoddy journalism" part.

"hardass" - might this be the now journalistic martinet WOODWARD?

The hyperlink on the quoted phrase leads to a movie link, or I wouldn't bother everybody. Tia.

[lark]

5. Eugene Robinson?

That's who I thought of, but it could be Woodward I guess.

[UTUSN]

14. Ty, but it looks like it's the Marty person below. n/t

[Eleanors38]

7. I'll see your Bezos, and raise with my quarter-billion loan from Carlos Slick to the NYT.

Betcha you can't match that since WaPo divested itself of Kaplan on-line mills.

[UTUSN]

16. Ty, but it looks like it's the Marty person below. n/t

[deurbano]

9. It's Martin Baron. Liev Schreiber played him in Spotlight. Baron was previously at the Boston Globe.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/watching-oscars-will-be-very-personal-this-year-because-im-in-spotlight/2016/02/23/5ecf08d8-d502-11e5-9823-02b905009f99_story.html

[rurallib]

11. thank you - if the real man is anything like the guy in the movie

can we clone a few thousand of him?

[deurbano]

17. Charles Pierce and others (see link) say he's the "real" deal.

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a39968/martin-baron-spotlight-washington-post/

He definitely seems worth cloning!

[UTUSN]

12. Ahhh. Ty. n/t

[blogslut]

10. Marty Baron, the editor of the Washington Post

The reference, in the online piece, is hyperlinked to a youtube clip from the film "Spotlight" featuring the actor who plays Baron.

[UTUSN]

13. Ahhh. Ty. n/t

[truebluegreen]

20. Marty Baron is the editor of the Washington Post.

He was the (brand-new) editor of the Boston Globe when they broke the church pedofile scandal, portrayed by Liev Schreiber in the movie "Spotlight." His character is well-described in that quote.

[bmstee01]

6. people really are sickof the emails

I know the news wishes Hillary would stick to a simple response about her emails, but I have found that most people are starting to get the message and even a few people have said that they feel like at this point we are invading her privacy by continuously sifting through her emails.
Those of us that love Hillary need to come out of the closet. I'll admit that I have been afraid to speak up bc I know how people feel, but I've noticed that the average person is actually more flexible this time. They don't like Trump, but they have been made to feel like Hillary is a bad choice too. We have to go out and tell people why we love her and help set the record straight. Many people I knew had a firm opinion in 2004, 2008, 2016. They are just waiting for someone to make them feel good about making a choice.

[calimary]

18. Well I don't mind at all stepping up and setting the record straight.

Doctor's office visit a few weeks ago. I said my usual closing comment - "...and don't forget to vote!" The doctor and her assistant mumbled something about dissatisfaction with both options, and the whole "I-don't-trust-her" bullshit. I couldn't help myself. I jumped right in on that.
"That poor woman has been PERSECUTED! Relentlessly! For what? TWENTY FIVE YEARS almost? I've never seen anything like it in my whole life! And they never come up with ANYTHING! There's NOTHING! What was it? Eight Benghazi investigations? Nine Benghazi investigations? And they came up with NOTHING! Except wasting our tax money when they should be working on job creation!"

And I could tell from the reaction that - well, hmmm, nobody'd really thought of it that way before. Why? Because the media refuses to lead us there. They just keep piling on. It's about the questions that keep being thrown up - that have all been answered with "there's NOTHING to this, either". But we've gotta keep on biting down on the questions - even after they've been answered again and again and the answer's always "there's NOTHING to this, either!"

And I went on just a wee bit more...
"I mean, could you imagine being persecuted like that for more than TWO DECADES? Could you imagine just trying to get out there and help people in need, and everybody chews on your ass without stopping? Wouldn't you be careful with your words and maybe over-protective - if there were haters going through YOUR underwear drawer and YOUR bellybutton lint day after day after day? I can't believe it, myself! I think I'd go nuts! The fact that she even keeps getting up in the morning and keeps trying - THAT amazes me."

The "hmm's" and other assorted muffled grunts in response strongly suggested this was a different take on all-things-Hillary, that simply hadn't occurred to them before. I don't know if I changed any minds, but I may have opened one or two of them. I DO know I gave some of those minds something different to think about than the non-stop Hillary-hate-machine that cranks and churns nonstop, 24/7/365.

Sometimes, seems to me, there are people out there in Not-Paying-That-Much-Attention-Land who only absorb bits and pieces of what they half-hear among the background noise - of news and talk radio that they probably aren't focused on.

They BADLY need to hear some different takes on these things.

They BADLY need to hear another side to it. Or THE other side to it.

They VERY BADLY need to hear that there's another way to look at it, or another reason to look at it, or other facts or contexts to take into account (that they're not taking into account or they aren't even considering because they never even HEARD any other facts or contexts).

I'd suggest - if the opportunity ever comes up, GRAB IT! Offer a different take on it or a different and more informed way to look at it. Whenever I've tried that, I always find that at least one person heard a different take on Hillary than they were expecting, and certainly a different take on the REALITY about Hillary than they're used to hearing. Sometimes, you may be the FIRST AND ONLY real truth-teller they'll have heard.

[democrattotheend]

22. Bernie said it best last year

"The American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn e-mails."



Sadly, the media is not yet sick of talking about them.

You make an interesting point about how it's getting to the point of invading her privacy. She already disclosed all of her work-related e-mails. Enough already!

Welcome to DU, btw.

[NBachers]

8. I'm unclear on the concept here; the article doesn't elaborate- this is all a bit too cryptic for me

We have a Washington Post article that's critical of something about the New York Times.

I don't see the smoke, bombs, and bodies of a war. Maybe I'm just too dense.

[Augiedog]

15. This email fiasco has always been a stalking horse. The repukes have no useful policies or issues

that can stand pubic scrutiny so they obfuscate via HRC. The repukes have become senseless drones of the extreme right wing billionaire class. The Bengazistas and Emailerites of the Looney bin right gave up on America and said to the that billionaire class, "here, tread on me then piss on me when you're done". Well, they ARE pissing on you and all the rest of us.

[democrattotheend]

23. Benghazistas and Emailerites

Love the terminology!