From Washington Post ombudsman Andrew Alexander's November 1 column:
The Post's Howard Kurtz, arguably the nation's premier media writer, for many years has hosted the Sunday morning CNN press program "Reliable Sources." He often is criticized by bloggers and readers because he's paid by CNN, which he also covers.
Kurtz, a workhorse of a reporter, has a sizable following in print, online and on the air. But being paid by CNN presents an inescapable conflict that is at odds with Post rules. They state that a reporter or editor "cannot accept payment from any person, company or organization that he or she covers." There can be exceptions for some groups, such as broadcast organizations, "unless the reporter or editor is involved in coverage of them."
Kurtz, the Post media writer since 1990, got approval to appear on "Reliable Sources" about 15 years ago from then-Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr.
"My track record makes clear that I've been as aggressive toward CNN -- and The Washington Post, for that matter -- as I would be if I didn't host a weekly program there," Kurtz said. He discloses his CNN affiliation at the end of his columns and relevant news stories for The Post. And he's identified with The Post on "Reliable Sources."
Still, would The Post allow a reporter who covers energy to be paid on the side by a big oil company?
From Breitbart.tv on October 31:
From the October 31 Washington Post article, "ACORN video creates new conservative star"
But among some conservatives there's a sense that what Breitbart and others are building is a more coordinated path to bypass mainstream media.
"We don't need The Washington Post to cover things anymore," said staunch conservative Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.). "Something can get on a conservative blog, then on Fox News, then it's everywhere."
Jon Stewart's annihilation this week of the bogus Fox News talking point about it separates news from opinion, represented the umpteenth example of how Comedy Central does a better job reporting on the press than do supposedly serious journalists.
Stewart's program did what virtually no other mainstream media outlet or elite media pundit has been willing to do since the dispute with the White House began, and that is shine a spotlight on what Fox News actually produces. It's a no-brainer, right? The White House had made very specific allegations about the shoddy type of partisan and false programming Fox News airs, so it would seem logical while covering the controversy that journalists actually examined those allegations in detail, right?
Not among Beltway journalists it's not.
For weeks, pundits only wanted to chatter about how the White House and how its decision to fact-check blatantly bogus Fox News 'reporting' was just an awful move. It was petty and thin-skinned and short-sighted and uncivil. "Absolutely crazy."
Everyone agreed that it was the Obama administration's behavior that was waaaaay out of bounds. Fox News'? Pundits and reporters didn't much care. And most of them pretended not to understand why the White House was so upset. What was so bad about Fox news, journalists scratched their heads, as they pretended that Media Matters hadn't laid out that case ad nauseam for weeks.
But then Stewart came along and did what nobody else on on the mainstream stage was willing to do. And once again, it's a comedian who shamed the press for not even thinking about doing it job.
Stimulus Fueled Much of Expansion
The U.S. economy would have turned in a far worse performance in the third quarter without help from the federal government.
Eighty advertisers have reportedly dropped their ads from Glenn Beck's Fox News program since he called President Obama a "racist" who has a "deep-seated hatred of white people." Here are his October 30 sponsors, in the order they appeared:
From Fox News contributor Andrea Tantaros' Twitter feed