I suppose this may have already been covered here, and if so, my apologies. In in attempt to find out what the
Washington Post might say about its abysmal decision to run Dana Milbank's
insulting and ludicrous column on Rep. John Conyers's landmark hearing into the Downing Street Minutes, I found this
ombudsman report by Michael Getler, in which he states:
Milbank is one of the paper's most talented and observant reporters. On the other hand, for the past several months he has also been serving as a columnist, frequently writing observations that go beyond straight reporting in a column labeled "Washington Sketch" that appears in the news pages of the A-section. On Friday, for example, The Post covered an unofficial antiwar hearing on Capitol Hill only in a Milbank column. Several readers found this inappropriate.
Translation: Milbank was one of the paper's most talented and observant reporters. But now he's just a "Washington Sketch" kind of guy and no longer taken seriously around here as a reporter. So we gave him a little column to knock around in. It's just a silly little column, folks!
Unfortunately, it has never been announced or explained to Post readers that reporter Milbank is also now columnist Milbank.
Translation: Unfortunately, it has never been announced or explained to Post readers that reporter Milbank has been "demoted."
The reference to "wing nuts," as in left-wing nuts and right-wing nuts, appeared in the June 8 column, not a "news story," as many e-mailers wrongly stated. This is also understandable because FAIR neglected to tell its subscribers that this was clearly marked as a "Washington Sketch" and not a news story.
Translation: Try to understand. Anything clearly marked as a "Washington Sketch" story should not be taken seriously. "Washington Sketch" is our way of allowing our wayward Dana some room to vent, that's all. It's like his little playpen, folks, nothing more than that. Our apologies that this was not made clear to confused readers.
Post Assistant Managing Editor Liz Spayd said "the term [wingnuts] referred to one specific group" and not everyone who was questioning coverage of the memo. As for the term "wing nuts," she said "that word is probably sharper than it should have been." I agree. It was a needless red flag that undoubtedly would be read as disparaging beyond the group that Milbank was referring to. But columnists do get more leeway and the term has infiltrated political discussion in these heated times.
Translation: "Needless red flag" means another unfortunate tic from Dana that fell under the radar. Basically, dear readers, Milbank is a kind of "loose canon," and there isn't much can do about it here except give him a lot of "leeway."
We might have been paying more attention to the column if Milbank himself was not such a pain in the ass. But because he is, we try to ignore him. Thus, what he writes is often ignored as well. Our apologies.
Here's Milbank's view: "While you have been within your rights as ombudsman over the past five years to attempt to excise any trace of colorful or provocative writing from the Post, you are out of bounds in asserting that a columnist cannot identify as 'wingnuts' a group whose followers have long been harassing this and other reporters and their families with hateful, obscene and sometimes anti-Semitic speech."
Translation: (under his breath) Good lord, that old canard! Thrown out when nothing else makes sense, when one has blown it and is shown finally and irrevocably to be an utterly worthless hack!
Ahem. (Composes himself)
Please note this important clarification, dear readers. The idea that those who disagree with Dana Milbank are hateful, obscene, and anti-Semitic is solely the opinion of Dana Milbank. And we stand by that.
Please folks, try to understand. Try to think back to that family party you took your special new loved one too, and how embarrassed you felt by Uncle Tom, who was quite drunk, or by your aunt Millie, who is a bit, well, funny in the head. Dana Milbank is like that uncle or aunt around here, folks. We can't do anything about that. That's why he writes a column called Washington Sketch.
Please. Pause and think about that title for a minute before you write to me again. Thank you.
Now, on to our coverage of Syria . . .