Sunday, May 18, 2008

What's going wrong at The New Republic

The New Republic has just posted senior editor Michelle Cottle’s “What Went Wrong?” which it hypes as the “exclusive story of Hillary's fall, as told by the high-level advisors, staffers, fundraisers, and on-the-ground organizers who lived it.”

Before you decide to put everything else aside and read Cottle’s “exclusive story,” take a look at the first comment on the article’s thread:

Great...anonymous people, edited quotes, more throwing mud on Clinton by any means necessary. Thanks media. Let's see what fun we all have from here till November. I'm sure the Republicans have found nothing in OB's past to use to swat him down like a fly. Obama wouldn't hold anything back from you guys, right?
The commenter has nailed it. Just take a look at the following section of “What Went Wrong?” headed “Problems With The Press”
"The way we handled you guys was a mistake on our part. What we're hearing is that we truly treated people badly and weren't accessible enough or open enough. We had bad relationships with reporters, and it probably bit us on the ass."

"We ran a press operation that lost all credibility with the press through endless and pointless memos like, 'Where's the Bounce?' and polling memos that cherry-picked only positive polls when we were up and ignored polling when we were down."

"Even among Clinton spokespeople long known for their heavy-handed ways, Phil Singer stood out for his all-too-common and accepted profanity-laced tirades and abusive behavior--both at colleagues and the media, who were all too happy to direct his comeuppance toward Hillary at a time she needed them most."
Now there’s an example of exclusive, carefully sourced, in depth journalism. All that talk we’ve heard about the press in the tank for Sen. Obama isn’t really true. Anything nasty said about Sen. Clinton was all her staff’s fault, darn it. We have three anonymous quotes that prove that.

They say people – mostly liberals and leftists – actually pay for what TNR delivers. Can that be true?

A better title for the article would have been: “What’s Going Wrong At The New Republic.

The entire article’s here.


Anonymous said...

John -

The New Republic, like the rest of the MSM, is not to be believed. After the phony story by a supposed American military man in Iraq (I forget the name), could with the absence of fact checking, simply makes the New Republic a not very credible publication. That what happens when someone suffers from "Bush Derangement Syndrome" or when someone becomes committed to a particular viewpoint. What the New Republic has done to Mrs. Clinton is analogous to what your local newspapers and the rest of the MSM did to the lacrosse players. They have created a meta-narrative of what they want to be true, and not a narrative of what is true.

John - you are doing a great job bringing together all the stray bits of pieces of information to give us an informed view of what is going on. Keep up the great work.

Jack in Silver Spring