All Blog Posts from Public Eye

"One of the hallmarks of netroots culture was a complete disconnect from history – meaning, basically, anything that had happened before 1998. The political consciousness of most of the bloggers seemed to begin sometime around impeachment, when they had first tuned in. Whatever had gone on before then, the fight between Clinton and the liberal establishment, the very real debates inside the party over trade and taxes and defense – all of these things felt as ancient to the bloggers as the underlying causes of the Peloponnesian War, and about as useful. It wasn't just that the bloggers didn't know much about the political world before impeachment, it was that they didn't want to know, either. So burning was their contempt for "Washington insiders" and the "mainstream media" that they were moved to dismiss not just the individuals who fell into these categories, but all the knowledge such people had accumulated. In a sense, the way the netroots saw it, the more you knew about Democratic politics before 1998, the less relevant you actually were."

--Matt Bai, author
"The Argument – Billionaires, Bloggers, and the Battle to Remake Democratic Politics "

"One of the hallmarks of netroots culture was a complete disconnect from history – meaning, basically, anything that had happened before 1998. The political consciousness of most of the bloggers seemed to begin sometime around impeachment, when they had first tuned in. Whatever had gone on before then, the fight between Clinton and the liberal establishment, the very real debates inside the party over trade and taxes and defense – all of these things felt as ancient to the bloggers as the underlying causes of the Peloponnesian War, and about as useful. It wasn't just that the bloggers didn't know much about the political world before impeachment, it was that they didn't want to know, either. So burning was their contempt for "Washington insiders" and the "mainstream media" that they were moved to dismiss not just the individuals who fell into these categories, but all the knowledge such people had accumulated. In a sense, the way the netroots saw it, the more you knew about Democratic politics before 1998, the less relevant you actually were."

--Matt Bai, author
"The Argument – Billionaires, Bloggers, and the Battle to Remake Democratic Politics "

"One of the hallmarks of netroots culture was a complete disconnect from history – meaning, basically, anything that had happened before 1998. The political consciousness of most of the bloggers seemed to begin sometime around impeachment, when they had first tuned in. Whatever had gone on before then, the fight between Clinton and the liberal establishment, the very real debates inside the party over trade and taxes and defense – all of these things felt as ancient to the bloggers as the underlying causes of the Peloponnesian War, and about as useful. It wasn't just that the bloggers didn't know much about the political world before impeachment, it was that they didn't want to know, either. So burning was their contempt for 'Washington insiders' and the 'mainstream media' that they were moved to dismiss not just the individuals who fell into these categories, but all the knowledge such people had accumulated. In a sense, the way the netroots saw it, the more you knew about Democratic politics before 1998, the less relevant you actually were."

--Matt Bai, author
"The Argument – Billionaires, Bloggers, and the Battle to Remake Democratic Politics "

Freelabor.blogspot.com: A free daily in Boston called BostonNow is printing work by bloggers. Naturally, "they have not… received money from the paper for their work," but they do get "press credentials or consulting services to help bloggers make money from traffic on their sites." Um, thanks?

Sue You Guys, I'm Going Home: Journalists may be getting dragged into court with depressing regularity lately, but three reporters actually want to see the inside of a courtroom. That's because investigators working for Hewlett-Packard examined their phone records, prompting them to sue for invasion of privacy. (Some of the other journalists who were monitored are in settlement discussions with the company.) The lawsuit is an unusual step – as the Times points out, "[n]ews organizations and reporters generally decline to pursue financial settlements with companies or individuals they write about because of the possible perception that they might be trading coverage for compensation."

Meanwhile, Ricki Lake Endorses Mike Gravel: Oprah Winfrey can sell books, bald advice-peddlers, and "Superfoods." But can she sell a presidential candidate? Winfrey told Larry King that she was supporting Barack Obama “because I know him personally.” Hillary Clinton, it's worth noting, has been on Oprah's show, chatting with her on her 50th birthday a decade ago. "She loves Oprah," Marsha Berry, Clinton's spokeswoman, said at the time. Awkward!

As the Libby trial has induced a flood of ink discussing the increasing number of reporters confronted with subpoenas, the case of jailed blogger Josh Wolf continues to draw attention.

Today, his story lands in the Washington Post, where Howard Kurtz looks at the question at the very core of Wolf's case: Is a blogger a journalist?

He's spent the last six months in a California prison for refusing to comply with a court order to turn over a video he shot of a violent San Francisco protest during a G-8 summit meeting. Wolf posted a portion of the video on his blog and sold some of it to local television stations. And his rationale for withholding it "is less than crystal clear," writes Kurtz, since he isn't really protecting any confidential sources, as was the case with Judy Miller of the New York Times or the San Francisco Chronicle reporters who recently avoided a prison sentence after their source came forward.

According to Wolf, "There was a trust established between people involved in the organization that I was covering and myself . . . that what I chose to release was what I chose to release, and that I wasn't an investigator for the state."

As far as the U.S. Attorney prosecuting him is concerned, Wolf needs "to come to grips with the fact that he was simply a person with a video camera who happened to record some public events."

But a classification as a journalist would probably not do Wolf any good anyway; his is a federal case and there are no federal shield laws for journalists.

Wolf has "repeatedly lost in the courts," including an appeal to the 9th Circuit, which upheld the grand jury's request for his testimony. Failing a solution from a mediation session today, "he will likely remain imprisoned at least until the current grand jury's term expires in July."

Well, yesterday's news that blogger Amanda Marcotte was resigning from the Edwards' campaign after a whole lot of hoopla was not the final chapter of this story.

Melissa McEwan, who says she was not hired by the Edwards' campaign as a blogger, but as a "part time technical advisor," has resigned that post. (She was widely identified in the press as a blogger.) An announcement of her departure is on her personal blog: "This was a decision I made, with the campaign's reluctant support, because my remaining the focus of sustained ideological attacks was inevitably making me a liability to the campaign, and making me increasingly uncomfortable with my and my family's level of exposure."

The Catholic League is demanding that John Edwards fire a pair of liberal bloggers, Amanda Marcotte and Melissa McEwan, who recently signed up with the Edwards campaign.

The bloggers' crime? They're "anti-Catholic vulgar trash-talking bigots,” according to Catholic League President Bill Donohue. ABC's Terry Moran has a roundup of some of the pair's comments, which they made before they joined Edwards. Among them was this, from Marcotte, on the Catholic Church's position on birth control:

Q: What if Mary had taken Plan B after the Lord filled her with his hot, white, sticky Holy Spirit? A: You’d have to justify your misogyny with another ancient mythology.

Media Matters notes that Donahue has his own history of incendiary speech, including this: "Hollywood is controlled by secular Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular. It's not a secret, OK? And I'm not afraid to say it. ... Hollywood likes anal sex. They like to see the public square without nativity scenes. I like families. I like children. They like abortions."

Great stuff on both sides, really.

Read full post…

MarketWatch columnist Jon Friedman disagrees with the idea that bloggers are suddenly important. CJR Daily’s Liz Cox Barrett wrote earlier this week that one of the first tests for Tony Snow as the new White House press secretary, will be to satisfy bloggers. Friedman responds:

Obviously, bloggers can do a lot of important work -- ask Dan Rather, who lost his job as anchor of "The CBS Evening News" not long after bloggers exposed the deep flaws in a CBS broadcast about President Bush's National Guard record.

But if any people think that bloggers have become a more dominant media force than television or -- dare I say it -- print, they really need a reality check.

Sorry, folks. Whether you like it or not, the much-criticized, heavily-flawed Mainstream Media still rules.

And, just in case you’re not sure what Friedman’s point is, here’s his media Web question of the day: “Is it just me, or do you also find that a lot of bloggers are a little too self-important for their own good?”

Meanwhile, Washington Post media writer Howard Kurtz is much kinder to bloggers in his Media Notes column today but signals he too may be tiring of the trend:

I write again today about blogging because I believe it has become the most vibrant, innovative and controversial form of information delivery in the media world today.

Also, I was stuck for a column.

It ain’t easy being a blogger these days.

Read full post…

The word of the day is: “overreact.” As in, bloggers and commentators certainly did overreact to our posting about journalists who blog. Perhaps the words should have been lack-of-comprehension, but we’ll give everyone the benefit of the doubt and say they just overreacted.



If one reads our entry about journalist bloggers, it’s really pretty clear what we were shooting for. Brian stipulated in the opening that the purpose of this was an exercise in looking at journalists who are writing blogs that “allow them to say what they don’t on the air or in print.” Perhaps the parameters of this could have been explained a little better, but we thought it was fairly clear. We were trying to demonstrate how many people who are best known as MSM members are now blogging.



Apparently not. Here’s what Hugh Hewitt had to say:

”This is really funny. CBS Speaks! And I’m ‘right on the line’ but don’t qualify! Egads. Not up to Brian (‘I haven’t always been a journalist’) Montopoli’s measure. Out, out, damn spot.”

It seems that Hewitt may have started a little stampede here judging by some of the comments posted to our entry. At no point in the story did we judge these blogs in any way, positive or negative. At no point did we recommend them for their content. We simply pointed out their existence.



Hewitt has always been among those leading the charge in demanding more transparency, openness and humility from the MSM. I confess, I just don’t get this one. Is it that hubristic to simply make a list?



In some ways it’s a hat tip to Hewitt and others that so many in the MSM are jumping aboard. This list shows how many MSM-journos are using the blog format.



But in all, well, humility, Public Eye, as far as I know, is the most serious attempt to take on the bigger Hewitt project of openess and accountability. We wish he would have taken the time to engage us in a much more serious manner.



Maybe tomorrow’s word of the day can be: “relax.”

Read full post…

He may not show up on our TV screens every night anymore, but Dan Rather yesterday demonstrated his knack for colorful description remains intact.



Appearing at the National Press Club, the former CBS News anchor said that bloggers today represent a “possible new form of journalism.” Rather was questioned by veteran journalist Marvin Kalb as part of the ongoing Kalb Report series, hosted by George Washington University and Harvard’s Shorenstein Center for the Press, Politics and Public Policy. Here’s how Shari Wolk of GW’s Daily Colonial reports it:

“Kalb asked Rather whether or not bloggers were journalists. Rather acknowledged a transitional period in the media, and was hesitant to attach a definitive label. Presently, Rather considers the blogs a “possible new form of journalism,” the viability of which depends on the writers’ accountability by attaching their name to their work.”

Asked about the national guard story of one year ago that spawned an internal probe, Rather “explained that the story’s ‘thermonuclear potential for reaction’ were not recognized, and that he was ‘remarkably unprepared for criticism,’” according to Wolk’s account. Rather also “made it clear that CBS would not allow him” to pursue the story. Now there’s a surprise. After the Thornburgh-Bocardi report, it’s pretty clear why that would be the case.


In a lighter moment, Rather discussed the changing media landscape. Reminded that some 30 million viewers still tune into the network evening news broadcasts, Rather responded, “fifty million people watch that nymphomaniac housewives show.” You gotta give credit where credit is due, he still has a very unique way with words.

Read full post…