WaPo reporter dismisses "silly" questions about paper's balance
March 16, 2009 12:21 pm ET by Jamison Foser
Yesterday, the Washinton Post opinion page "asked members of Congress and others whether federal budget earmarks are defensible" -- but all three members of Congress were Republicans. As Media Matters noted, "The Post's omission of contributions by Democratic lawmakers is consistent with a pattern Media Matters for America has identified in the media of portraying earmarks as a practice unique to Democrats."
During an online discussion today, Post reporter Ed O'Keefe was asked about the Post printing the opinions of Republicans, and Republicans alone -- and dismissed the question as "silly":
Skewed Opinions?: Are you ever embarrassed by the Post's Opinion pages, since they so regularly skew to the right?
On Sunday the Post "asked members of Congress and others whether federal budget earmarks are defensible." The three members of Congress whose responses were listed -- Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), Rep. Ron Paul (Tex.) and Rep. Jeff Flake (Ariz.) -- are all Republicans; no Democratic members of Congress were quoted. The Post's omission of contributions by Democratic lawmakers is consistent with a pattern I've been noting in the media of portraying earmarks as a practice unique to Democrats. What's your take on this, Ed?
Ed O'Keefe: My take is I have no take on this.
The Opinion and news sections are kept separate at The Post. I have no input or idea what they're working on, and vice versa. And even if I did have an opinion, I wouldn't share it.
There've been several silly questions like this today, and this one's the most tame. Folks, save it.
What's silly is the idea that O'Keefe is incapable of having an opinion about what the Post's Opinion section does, and that he would so blithely dismiss a reader's valid question.
Wow! An online discussion and he throws it off as silly & tame??
How embarrassing. WaPo's ideologies are showing. If it was not intentional, then the response would have been along these lines: "really? hadn't noticed. maybe something to look into"
The entire transcript is painful to read. The other "silly questions" appear to be the ones that rightfully attack the front page WaPo article that accuses Obama for reversing his post-partisanship campaign promise because he dared to point out the fact that he inherited the fiscal crisis.There were also a couple commenters who questioned the Cheney article.
O'Keefe simply refuses to address those comments. He responded to all the Cheney questions by saying, "one person's opinion..."
Centrist!? Yeah, if you redifine centrist to mean anyone who falls somewhere between Michelle Malkin and Bill Kristol.
To be fair to WaPo, there is a good reason why they only cited Republicans here-- because they are the only ones who have been griping about earmarks. To the Dems, it's not an issue.
Also-- about right-wing leanings there-- remember, last week, they were the only paper that framed the Repub 59-vote defeat of the budget bill movement as a "filibuster" on the Republicans part.
They were right, and the rest of the MSM seems to think that if the Repubs aren't enagaing in a Jimmy Stewart type tactic, it's not obstruction.
You were probably being facetious, but still, there is no "between" Malkin and Kristol. If not and if that is your lone rebuttal to my last comment, then you apparently don't understand centrism or apparently think Kristol's part-time column is highly representative of the WaPost - it isn't.
All I was saying is that the WaPost, in terms of politics falls in the center of the political spectrum, with some reporters/columnists leaning left (Jonathan Capeheart, Eugene Robinson, EJ Dionne, Chuck Lane) and a growing number leaning right (George Will, Robert Novak, Richard Perle, Kristol), and still others who do a good but not always great job of straight news reporting or commentary (Scott Wilson, Dana Milbank), mixed in with others like Ann Kornblut who are often just terrible at reporting, period.
And then there's its star media critic Howard Kurtz, who in the course of pointing out media bias sometimes is biased himself towards the right-wing view and guilty of flawed articles, as MMFA points out here and on the main blog.
It's an interesting mix of characters at the WaPost, but lately, as liberal watchdogs like MMFA points out, too often they engage in unbalanced or just plain bad reporting, no matter who wrote the story.