Despite having clearly run out of any material that could be considered interesting, Tucker Carlson's Daily Caller continues to bang away at the Journolist email archives, publishing yet another story this morning under the sensationalist headline: "Journolist debates making its coordination with Obama explicit." In what's become a hallmark of their Journolist "exposés," the story itself does nothing to bolster the headline's provocative claim.
Here's the extent of the "debate," as it was laid out in the Daily Caller article:
[Harpers' Luke] Mitchell replied: "Fair enough! But it seems to me that a concerted effort on the part of the left partisan press could be useful. Why geld ourselves? A lot of the people on this list work for organizations that are far more influential than, say, the Washington Times.
"Open question: Would it be a good use of this list to co-ordinate a message of the week along the lines of the GOP? Or is that too loathsome? It certainly sounds loathsome. But so does losing!"
Ezra Klein of the Washington Post, the founder of Journolist, quickly jumped in: "Nope, no message coordination. I'm not even sure that would be legal. This is a discussion list, though, and I want it to retain that character," he wrote.
Mitchell replied: "Fair enough, Ezra! The list is great at as it is and I didn't mean to suggest anything out of bounds. I am still curious about the reluctance of the left media to organize, though. The message discipline on the right seems to be one of its key advantages."
David Roberts of Grist seemed to scold Roberts for his idea: "Just read past messages on this list, Luke. Everyone here is a /journalist /or an /independent analyst/. Their job is to /say what they think/, not to support Obama. Suggest that they focus on more electorally helpful -- and equally true -- messages, and they will bridle."
That's it. Mitchell poses the question. Klein immediately and unequivocally shoots it down. Mitchell assents. Roberts points out that the idea wouldn't work due to the integrity of Journolist's members. Moreover, as Klein's response makes clear, the "debate" was with regard to something they would never be allowed to do. So the story has, quite literally, no point.
Whatever impact the Daily Caller might have had with their first salvo of Journolist stories was already undone by their slipshod journalism and persistent dishonesty. Now they just look ridiculous in continually going back to the already-dry well and trying to convince everyone they're still pulling up water.