Skip to main content

View Diary: The bottom line (367 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Here's why: (3.92)
    You wasted your time, and it allowed him to pretend to listen to all sides. Why do you bother with him?

    Because now everyone knows that Howard Kurtz was definitively given both sides of the story.  He can't claim he didn't know about the Plame connections, the false name, the possible connections to pornography/prostitution.  He was told.

    He knew all that, and he then filed the report he filed.  That's much more damning than if Kos et. al. had refused to talk to him, such that Kurtz filed based on only talking to one side.

    Kurtz definitively stated that his problem, in this story, was whether "liberal bloggers" went "too far" in investigating Gannon's real identity. As a journalist whose beat is covering other journalists, however, it must be noted that he didn't consider having fake journalists using fake names to ask fake questions (and be given fake CIA memos) to be newsworthy or worth exploring. That tells us quite a bit about how Howard Kurtz approaches journalism.

    •  To reiterate my own point: (3.91)
      As a journalist whose beat is covering other journalists, Howard Kurtz doesn't consider having a journalist in the White House who:

      1. Operates under an assumed name

      2. Has no meaningful journalism experience whatsoever.

      3. Works directly for a GOP-linked organization that was previously denied credentials due to their partisan, non-journalistic background.

      4. Files "reports" that copy liberally from White House released text.

      5. Has background ties to military-based gay pornography/prostitution.

      6. Was given, by somebody "high-up" in the White House, classified information about the identity of an active CIA undercover operative working on WMD-related intelligence.

      ... to be a newsworthy breach of journalistic ethics, nor of White House security, national security, etc., etc., etc.  He doesn't consider any of that to be meaningfully newsworthy.  And to reiterate, Kurtz covers journalism and journalistic ethics as his primary beat.

      Think about that, everyone.  In his report, Kurtz has just given you a mountain of information on how the D.C. press operates, don't you think?  Might someone want to follow up on exploring what that means?

      •  Don't forget (none)
        possibly connected to illegal activity (prostitution)

        "Our particular principles of religion are a subject of accountability to God alone."--Thomas Jefferson

        by hopesprings on Wed Feb 09, 2005 at 04:23:27 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  that;s exactly right. (none)
        Kurtz had his chance to do the right thing.
      •  This story has so many threads... (4.00)
        so many links, so much to follow.  The headline today should be:

        THE ESTABLISHED MEDIA INSTITUTIONS FAILED TO DO THEIR JOB

        Not the entire story.  Today's headline. If they had done their job, we wouldn't have been moved to do it for them.

        Blitzer is an establishment hack all the way down the line.  He wants to keep his power center in place.  Protecting his turf.  He's just as scard of Community Journalism as the administration is.  WHY.  We aren't profit driven and there are too many of us to intimidate.  If that's the case, how do they control us?

        We will peal away the onion.  Tomorrow's headline will be layer two.  Next week's will get farther into the onion.

        "Off we go into the Wild New Yonder"

        by NYBri on Wed Feb 09, 2005 at 07:59:41 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  read then learn (none)
        This is why bloggers have a bad name in the business.  read his media note column for the last two weeks and you'll see he DID cover the very same things you are accusing him of ignoring,   then go read his live online chat sessions.  The come back here and do a little research next time BEFORE you hit the reply button

        Knowledge is power Power Corrupts Study Hard Be Evil

        by Magorn on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 09:22:40 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  the line between commentators (3.66)
      and journalists is "What?" again?
      •  Hunter, that was awesome (4.00)
        Hunter's words should be posted everywhere with full attribution of course...This sums up Howiw Kurtz better than anything I have seen in a while:

        From Hunter:

        "...Kurtz definitively stated that his problem, in this story, was whether "liberal bloggers" went "too far" in investigating Gannon's real identity. As a journalist whose beat is covering other journalists, however, it must be noted that he didn't consider having fake journalists using fake names to ask fake questions (and be given fake CIA memos) to be newsworthy or worth exploring. That tells us quite a bit about how Howard Kurtz approaches journalism..."

        The money shot, if you ask me...

        I did not receive $ from Ketchum, U.S. Department of Ed or HHS to write this---though I wish I had.

        by Volvo Liberal on Wed Feb 09, 2005 at 04:15:56 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site