Howard Kurtz's terrible, horrible, no-good, very bad week
July 02, 2009 3:28 pm ET by Jamison Foser
Washington Post media critic Howard Kurtz has:
* Done no original reporting on the Washington Post's firing of Dan Froomkin
* Failed to ask Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank about a controversy over whether Milbank called another reporter a nasty name during a taping of Kurtz' television show
* Gotten scooped by a rival publication on an explosive story about the Washington Post auctioning off access to its reporters and editors to lobbyists and other interest groups.
Is it really too much to expect the nation's most famous media critic to be able to cover significant media stories that happen right under his own nose?
Incredibly, it might actually be more than Kurtz can handle, as I explain in my column today.
UPDATE: More from Marcy Wheeler on flaws in Kurtz's (eventual) article about the Post/lobbyist scheme. And from Adam Serwer on what Kurtz was writing about while Politico was drinking his milkshake.











Media Matters: "Context is everything": Why you should (still) never trust Andrew Breitbart
Media Matters: The right-wing rage machine unloads a frenzy of race-baiting
Media Matters: The greatest science "scandal" "in the history of man" predictably falls apart




It was colossally stupid of the Post to have Kurtz handle the lying CYA since he is personally implicated. At least The Atlantic was upfront about their salons as shown in this interview from November 2008. http://www.bizbash.com/washington/content/editorial/13433_profit_centers.php
You have to give it Mike Allen. He is a fearsome competitor. He probably knew Kurtz and his crew would mishandle the whole affair when he set the whole thing up. LOL