Forgive Me for Finding This Charming: A headline on the home page of the WaPo just now, about some of the recent travails of the Romney campaign:
Errors Hurting Romney Effort, Some in GDP Say….
What I treasure is this example of the ongoing struggles of the journalism biz to convey what reporters think is actually happening, while trying so hard not to seem opinionated or conclusory. "Romney Campaign Faces Distractions" is the headline you find if you click on the story. Tomorrow morning I'll see what headline the paper version has.
Iceberg getting nearer, some on Titanic say.
Again, I'm not talking about the Romney campaign, which unlike the Titanic could still bounce back. What I love is this little revelation about our craft, that of journalism, and the contortions we go through to abide by what we think are the rules. My thanks to whoever came up with this.
I, by contrast, am not amused. I am pissed off.
What a real journalist would do would be to tell us what he or she thinks is going on, and why.
What the fake journamalists at the Washington Post clown show do is (i) decide what is going on, (ii) hunt far and wide for a sock puppet who will say what the reporter thinks is going on, (iii) quote the sock puppet, (iv) deny that what the sock puppet says has anything to do with what the reporter thinks, and (v) refuse to talk about why the reporter picked that particular sock puppet.
It's an exercise in playing hide-the-ball--in telling the reader absolutely nothing about why the reporter has reached the conclusions that he or she has.
It's a waste of fish wrap.