Why has no one yet written in to say "Frist"?

For a really peculiar take on the L.A. Times story, see Bill Boyarsky's column at LAObserved.com. He demands a major investigation and quotes florid prose from the Staples scandal. It is all but imcomprehensible unless you know the story already, and even then it is nearly incomprehensible.

Kevin Drum: the Washington Post has a story on its front page right now about an electronic glitch that caused an incorrect headline to appear on their website for 51 seconds on Thursday.

Dewey defeats Truman is a classic. It's in no danger of being displaced by the WaPo problem.

A significant part of the "real" story, appeared in the last three paragraphs of the L.A. Times' own story on Andres' resignation.

It seems Andres has been a little high handed, when approached by editors and reporters with helpful "ideas" for opinion topics, which might curry favor with advertisers.

Leonard Downie Jr., the newspaper's executive editor, said he was upset that the newsroom was not notified. "This was a big story," Downie said. "The fact that we had a wrong report up for 51 seconds--even though it was unintentional--should have been known to us in the newsroom."

Give 'em hell, Len!

Now, about that enormous clusterfuck in Iraq you supported...

Jon Stewart on the Daily Show said the press was like a bunch of 5-year olds playing soccer. "The ball is here, chase it, OHHH, the ball is THERE go chase it, wait the ball is over THERE..."

Applies to real world stories as well as press-room soap operas.

Dewey defeats Truman is a classic. It's in no danger of being displaced by the WaPo problem.

Correct. However, it has been displaced by all the NYT and WaPo "WMDs in Iraq!!!" headlines.

Neither of these approach the non-scandal of Bathwatergate

I thought laboratory rats just told the truth when you electrocuted them.

BREAKING:

ABC News reports: “New documents show Gonzales approved firings of U.S. attorneys, contradicting earlier claims he was not closely involved.�

How long has it been since you worked in corporate America? In the wake of Enron and MCI/Worldcom and so on, this sort of thing is now the norm. It isn't just the media: every organization is dotting every I and crossing every T, to the point where any letter that even resembles a T or I gets crossed or dotted. This is the great age of "Accountability," "Accountability" meaning that small mistakes, or even the appearance of a mistake, must be punished to show that the organization takes "Accountability" with the proper amount of seriousness. The biggest fear that every corporate manager I know has is not that they will get poor results, but that they will have failed to address some kind of problem before it became a problem (notice the dog chasing its own tail aspect of this). Again, it isn't just the media. The media have their own issues, of course, but this particular issue is coming from the larger society.

Completely screwing up the coverage of American politics and foreign policy for the last 6 years is just too complicated to beginto think about; but 51 seconds, that they can understand!

They're sort of like those lab rats who receive nonstop electrical shocks completely at random and eventually go insane because they don't know what they're expected to do and what they aren't.

Um. "nonstop electrical shocks completely at random"? How can it be nonstop and random? Can rats go insane, and if so, how do you know? BTW, I'm a psychology professor and I've never heard of the "research" you're writing about. Maybe you're confusing it with the "learned helplessness" research done with dogs. Also, how do you know if rats know what's expected of them?

OK, I anthropomorphize sometimes too. But, Kevin...

Ha. Not only is Drum a bad guesser (Drum "guessed" earlier that "literrally" no one thought Martinez erred when, in fact, "many" LATers agreed w/ management's position).

But a rodent of the pink-eyed prissy pinwheel type himself.

Drum makes much of LAT managment "accepting" Martinez resignation despite Martinez's obvious overreaction by quitting in the first place.

Fault Tribune expats for arguable inconsistency on the "appearance of conflict," but don't fault them for Andrea the Diving Diva, his Bette Davis farewell, or Andrea's asinine appointment of Glazer as inaugural "guest editor."

Yes, I do mean Andrea [sic] and his lab-rat farewell, not Andres, a.k.a. Mr. Kelly Mullens.

I think Kevin might be talking about ulcer induction in monkeys through the adminstration of random electrical shocks. First you teach them to avoid shocks with a lever and then you disconnect the lever and watch them freak out operating the lever and trying not to fall asleep.

I think stress is induced in lab rats by not letting them hide, poking them, and exposing them to loud music and random lights. Probably someone used electrical shocks though.

Calling BS on chickenhawk again"

"It's all a ploy, obviously. They do this to make themselves appear ethical, but it's up to bloggers to expose when they use forged documents to smear the service of a Vietnam-era veteran who just happens to be a Republican president."

Where is the proof that the documents were forged?

Why did White House spokesperson Dan Bartlett say he believed the documents were genuine?

Why did Bush never order DOJ or DOD to investigate the origin of the documents?

Please answer this time or cease and desist posting your childish drivel.

Wrong headline for 51 seconds or being clueless about White House and the Iraq War for several years?

I think I should read the LA Times more.

Yes, he clearly means the learned helplessness experiments. And, yeah, I'd pretty much classify it as 'insane' when the animal can't act in its own self-interest 'coz it's learned that any action is likely to be punished.

And wasn't it done with pigeons? Or was that the random-reward superstition experiments?

BTW, I'm just a psych undergrad ;)

More Breaking:

I skinned a knuckle this afternoon.

The reason they made a big deal out of this is because Mr Media Howard Kurtz took Politico.com to task for writing a story that proved to be wrong about Mr Edwards suspending his campaign.

Well, let's see the journalists underreact to this: According to the Associated Press -- via the British media, natch, because MSNBC is too busy rerunning a Jeffrey Dahmer celebrity serial killer profile -- documents released Friday night show conclusively that "Attorney General Alberto Gonzales approved plans to fire several U.S. attorneys in a November meeting, according to documents released Friday that contradict earlier claims that he was not closely involved in the dismissals."

Gotcha, Alberto. Game. Set. Match. Adios.

Ooh. Ooh. Look -- isn't that Arnold Schwarzenegger over there? Hey, Governator, wait up ...

I certainly agree with Kevin about the problems in newspapers. I don't know whether or not the cause is public criticism, but that seerms like a good guess. Another possible reason for their oversensitivity might be fear of losing their job in the face of declining earnings.

The WP 51 second glitch, okay. But the LAT has been floundering for years; it's a trend in itself and need no global explanation.

Point of interest:
On March 13, 2007, Alberto Gonzales in a news conference said that he did NOT participate in discussion or have anything to do with the US A firings. I never saw documents. We never had a discussion about where things stood,'' Gonzales said then. ``What I knew was that there was an ongoing effort that was led by Mr. Sampson, vetted through the Department of Justice, to ascertain where we could make improvements in U.S. attorney performances around the country.''
Justice Department officials who briefed reporters tonight said they don't know if Gonzales actually approved the firings at the meeting.
The latest documents provide ``evidence of the attorney general's involvement much earlier than he previously acknowledged,'' said House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, a Michigan Democrat.... "

Newly released documents however show that he signed off on the plan:.
...The Nov. 27 meeting, held in Gonzales's conference room, was attended by top Justice Department officials to discuss ``the plan to inform the U.S. attorneys'' of their ouster, Roehrkasse said.
A Nov. 27 meeting, in which the attorney general and at least five top Justice Department officials participated, focused on a five-step plan for carrying out the firings of the prosecutors, Gonzales' aides said late Friday.
There, Gonzales signed off on the plan, which was drafted by his chief of staff, Kyle Sampson. Sampson resigned last week. Another Justice aide closely involved in the dismissals, White House liaison Monica Goodling, has also taken a leave of absence, two officials said.
The five-step plan approved by Gonzales involved notifying Republican home-state senators of the impending dismissals, preparing for potential political upheaval, naming replacements and submitting them to the Senate for confirmation.
Six of the eight prosecutors who were ultimately ordered to resign are named in the plan....

What was his testimony before congress again?

It's all a ploy, obviously. They do this to make themselves appear ethical, but it's up to bloggers to expose when they use forged documents to smear the service of a Vietnam-era veteran who just happens to be a Republican president.

Posted by: American Hawk on March 23, 2007 at 9:36 PM

Actually, it's probably more accurate to to call it plagiarism instead of forgery.

And I thought you had to see action in armed conflict and complete your tour to be a veteran. Just sayin'.

Mike: What was [Gonzales] testimony before congress again?

I'm amused at Sen. Arlen Specter's comment:

...reading Gonzales' USA Today column into the record. He paused.

"One day there will be a new attorney general, maybe sooner rather than later."

As someone who works at a community newspaper, and knows what it's like for face to face irate people to be on you over real issues, Len Downie needs to get a fucking grip.

Hawk has a point

The man who was elected President by the American people in 2000 WAS a Vietnam War veteran. His name was Al Gore.

Can we all please Get. A. Grip. If the executive editor of the Washington Post thinks a 51-second software hiccup is a "big story," he might want to think about early retirement.

I interpreted the "big story" to be John Edward's announcement.

kevin: agree with absolutely nothing you say on this one.

americanhawk: the assertions about your hero's chickenhawk military career were well-chronicled and substantiated before the gaffe on CBS. Bush has never -- NEVER -- repudiated the assertions that he ducked and skipped duty. His handlers have always --ALWAYS -- fallen back on the ``he received an honorable discharge'' evasion because they know -- they KNOW -- they can't produce a scintilla of evidence that he was actually in Alabama for more than a token appearance.
And just so you know the difference, when you get a bunch of jealous Vietnam vets, coach them into telling a phony, utterly repudiated story about a presidential candidate's war record then pay them off -- that's a smear campaign.

you're right, it's ridiculous that that mistake is a story, although the high-profile aspect of it—that two other outlets had actually reported it wrong—makes it necessary to acknowledge your own mistake on the same story, however accidental.

Downie did overreact, but I honestly believe that when he said "This was a big story," he was referring to the Edwards' announcement, and its A1 placement on the paper's Web site. to paraphrase what I believe he's saying here: It wasn't a mistake in a minor article, which happens to everyone on occasion and does not need to be reported to the newsroom or top management. This was on a major story of the day, and so he and the newsroom should have been alerted.

What has gone unremarked is that it wasn't JUST the headline: it was also the 4-line story summary. This raises the strong possibility that an entire "Edwards is Suspending His Bid" version of the article was also published for 51 seconds. Kurtz doesn't say if a bad version of the full story was published or not.

How exactly was that a "software hiccup"?

Sounds like human error to me.

Squawk: "...the service of a Vietnam-era veteran who just happens to be a Republican president."

Gosh, is that a lump in your throat or are you just glad to see me? You've hit new levels of inspiration on this one. Who can even count the number of young Americans who take "just happens" as their role model? Stand straight there, marine. You´ve made us all proud.

Journalists are what we used to have.

They've been replaced by corporate shills and 'Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous' whores calling themselves reporters.

'Wealthy people and their corporations own newspapers and fund think tanks, public affairs television, university chairs, advertising campaigns, lecture series and the like. Ordinary people do not. With few exceptions, these same organizations and institutions represent the views of the wealthy and well connected.' - Eric Alterman

I don't know why Kurtz and his editors treated this story this way. But this fits a pattern that largely predates the web. The pattern: Make a large show of correcting trivial press errors, even as you completely ignore bigger, larger press stories.

For myself, this goes back to late 99. I sent Kurtz two major press stories, which he ignored. In one case--the case of the press corps jeering Gore during the first Gore-Bradley debate--he passed on the story for the most ludicrous possible reason. (He wasn't at the debate, Kurtz e-mailed, so he didn't know what had occurred. As I had told him, three major scribes were on the record about the jeering and hissing.) Then, prodded into conducting a test, I sent him a local story about a Baltimore Sun music writer who had plagiarized one paragraph. Boom! Straight into the Post!

It's really just growing pains in the inevitable incorporation of the bloggers as a "Fifth-point-one" estate.

What the news media editors will need to learn (or re-learn) is their role as gatekeepers, keeping track of breaking stories in the blogs, then sending their reporters out to do the in-depth coverage of the issues that seem like they might be important.

After years (decades? centuries?) of having Washington and the big newspapers decide the news agenda, it will take time for the editors to turn 180 degrees and see Internet bloggers also having a say. When they do, I think they'll find them very handy. cf: the Gonzalez scandal where the bloggers started it and the press picked it up.

Glad to see the erudite Bob Somerby posting here.

And, Amway Hawk, did not mean to besmirch the war record of that VietNam-era "veteran", Pvt Quayle - Perhaps the blame could be placed on all of those Indiana pigeons sitting atop his "War Monument".

If president chicken hawk has nothing to hide about his military service, why won't he release his military records like every other politician who has served the nation?

The pattern: Make a large show of correcting trivial press errors, even as you completely ignore bigger, larger press stories.

Well, at least MSNBC didn't miss this breaking news story:
Donny says singing Osmonds may reunite

Poor journalists have to serve their editors, publishers, big shots looking for publicity, readers, other journalists, and those pesky bloggers.

Great article Kevin!

I recall Gulf War I; I was riveted to CNN 24x7.

About three years ago, I pulled the plug, mostly because commercial interruptions on most shows were getting to be so long, there was barely any content at all. I wasn't paying $60/month to watch commercials.

I recently had an opportunity to spend a weekend at a friend's house, and I watched CNN (actually Headline News) - and I was just shocked; it was All-Britney/Anna Nicole Smith-All-The-Time. Two hours of watching yeilded maybe a net 2 minutes of war coverage, absolutely zero politics. Guess I'm not signing back up anytime soon.

Why is it so bad?

No real competition.

Two fast-food-news joints competing to make the quickest, unhealthiest hamburgers.

"What’s more remarkable is how careful and controlled life is today. The atmosphere isn’t conducive to the kind of freedom you hear expressed in a lot of those sixties records."
Joe Boyd
The same is true for journalism and alot of other things in 2007.

Buy the ticket. Take the Ride.

What I've been wondering since the LA Times first announced this experiment in guest editors is does anybody besides Andres Martinez and his girlfriend think that rich, powerful, philanthropic, Oscar-winning movie producer Brian Grazier is an under-represented voice in the media?

And that's why it looks like a conflict of interest.

If Andres wanted to give the paper to David Geffen this week and Eli Broad the next to let them audition for ownership, that would be a public service. This was just sucking up.

On the other hand, maybe Brian could use the exposure, since I spelled his name "Grazier".

Kevin, I think you've misinterpreted Downie's quote: "This was a big story".

Based on the context, I don't believe he is referring to the Post's error as a big story, but to Elizabeth Edwards' cancer being a "big story."

Furthermore, the Post has every reason to be publicly embarrassed about this. Given their large readership, a significant number of people saw the incorrect story, even if it was only up for a minute. That is truly a big error for an organization whose entire business is based on allededly high-quality news reporting.

You've seen this movie before:
The gang of bandits invade the western town and begin abusing citizens. The few who have courage to speak up are humiliated and run out of town. Perhaps the town idiot or the drunk is killed in an ugly scene. The town people are craven and cowardly, they will praise the bandits and lick their boots.

This is Washington D.C. The gang of bad boys are the Nixon dregs and the Iran Contra scum. They're quite fearsome, being close to the military contractors, big banking and the energy industry, and they're known to always get even.

Clinton had none of this. He was governor of a hick state, a trailer trash wunderkind with no connections to any real power. He was safe to ridicule and boy did they ridicule him.

The MSM deserves to be held in complete contempt, and Washington has become a classic capital of the dying empire, full of intrigue, deceptive polemic and blackmail.

After six years of living in professional terror, it's no surprise the MSM is getting a bit weird. I have a feeling that we haven't seen the worst of it.