1/19/2006

Media Matters ..."From now on, I don't reply"

There was a day long ago in this country when the Washington Post stood up to a powerful Republican president who turned out to be a crook. Now we have a Republican president who is not only a crook, but he admits it in public without shame and dares anyone to challenge his totalitarian authority. Where's the Washington Post? Busy stuffing cotton balls in their ears

Media Matters on the issue:
The "attack" to which Howell is apparently referring is a Media Matters item in which we quoted Howell's January 10 email to us, at her request. Howell claimed in that email that she had previously said that Post reporter Dafna Linzer "was giving the administration's point of view" in her January 4 article. In fact, Howell had previously said that Linzer "was simply giving the administration's point of view as well as others." But with regard to the claim in question, Linzer had not provided the point of view of "others" in her article -- an omission that constitutes the original basis of the entire dispute.

Because Howell's email contained this inaccurate claim -- and because we do not share Howell's apparent belief that simply publishing misleading claims without rebuttal serves readers' interests -- Media Matters noted the flaws in Howell's argument. We leave it to readers to decide whether Howell's characterization of the Media Matters item as an "attack" says more about the item -- or about Howell's understanding of an ombudsman's role.

Comments at Media Matters:


AN OBUDSMAN WHO DOESN'T WANT SCRUTINY?

An obudsman is suppossed to represent the public and encourage transparency. She seems to consider herself above scrutiny, accountability, and transparency. That makes her unworthy to her position. A clarification is insufficient. She should resign forthwith and the readers of the Washington Post ought to demand it.
by - Intrepid Liberal Journal / Thursday January 19, 2006

Amazing-
her job is to respond to critics, and here she is-
refusing to do her job.
What is the Washington Post paying her for, anyway?
by - poichick / Thursday January 19, 2006

The Washington Post ain't what it used to be

So Madam ombudswoman has turned off her hearing aid.
Do you have any clue why people are so mad at you? Here's a hint:
The Washington Post used to be the newspaper that stood for the people, that fought for the people against the rich and powerful.
Now, the Washington Post is just a run-of-the-mill apologist for the Bush Administration. She's surprised people are upset?
There was a day long ago in this country when the Washington Post stood up to a powerful Republican president who turned out to be a crook. Now we have a Republican president who is not only a crook, but he admits it in public without shame and dares anyone to challenge his totalitarian authority. Where's the Washington Post? Busy stuffing cotton balls in their ears and turning off their blogs and email so they don't have to be faced with the truth: They are a bunch of hacks who would lick the spit off Bush's cowboy boots and do a little buck 'n wing if their massah told them to.
by - ebonius / Thursday January 19, 2006

Media Matters - Wash. Post ombudsman's new policy: "From now on, I don't reply"

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home