The day after and the smoke clears...

I wrote this yesterday under the headline, Is HuffPo becoming the New Drudge? Then decided it was too soon to be so harsh. But the point remained that the media are just swirling around themselves trying to fill air and space. And while their intentions may be good in some cases, their tactics are not.

Now Paul Bagala in HuffPo makes a great point about HOW reporters are doing their jobs and gives context to my exchange at the end. Also makes you ask, why would Fox do that? Easy, it fits their fear narrative that the Clinton liberals are coming back - what better way to energize the hateful wing of the Republican party?

I made some points about CNN and MSNBCs coverage yesterday, too.

HuffPo started out as a very cool blog, with a great line-up of people giving plenty of context and insight into the news across a very wide field - Entertainment, Politics, Media. Now, its got some serious news standard issues. Ads that look like content. Parodies too mingled with serious news. Only posting approved comments that dont disagree or question the authors (disclosure: Not one of my comments to Bonnie Fuller as she continues to work both sides of the street, exploiting celebrities, then pretending to have any integrity on HuffPo, have appeared).

Now the Obama slant is so obvious. Nothing but leading headlines to hurt Hillary. Thomas Edsall is running a piece with the headline "Clinton Allies May Dump Millions Into Anti-Obama Group" and "Cash Starved Clinton Considers Skipping Next Primaries"

The story goes on to feature denials by the 527 groups who would do the negative campaigning and NO sources for the primary pull out story.

Forget the Republican race reporting. I have very strong emotions about the Republican party and most of its current candidates, but HOW you win means as much as winning. Its what the Republicans forgot. Being right (in your mind) doesn't excuse you from the rules or standards.

Seems the stories have an agenda these days on HuffPo. I have emailed the author to ask his opinion on this. Lets see if he responds (or even has the time today).

Mr Edsall, I breathlessly await your posts, but the latest on the Clinton issues seems to lack any sources and the 527s are denying they are going negative. Are these just rumors or is this NEWS? It is very unclear, but the headlines definitely have a point of view and perhaps an agenda?

Respectfully,
Jay Marose
Sherman Oaks, CA

And he did. I have nothing but respect for true journalists, which Mr. Edsall is. He doesn't write his headlines, after all.

It is news. It is accurate based on direct reporting

Tom Edsall
Joseph Pulitzer II and Edith Pulitzer Moore Professor
Columbia Graduate School of Journalism
Huffington Post, Political Editor
New Republic, Correspondent

Fair enough, but I asked for further clarification at his convenience. Rumors without attribution are just that, after all. Until someone will go on the record, even on background, you can not make statements as facts. The old standard was, "If your mother says she loves you, get a second source" - but no more.

'Its true because I said so', doesnt quite do it for me, even if it does further my cause. We have to fix the whole process, even how its reported. Sure there was lots of panic yesterday, but the fact that no one went on record and the entire 'problem' went away with the results, well, in the rush to be first and have your story that matches everyone else's story up and running, is irresponsible, IMHO.

The story may very well be true. But, even as winners, we have to be better.