What about those Obama administration officials. Did anybody in the White House agree to this?

This stinks. It has got to be a fraud.

WaPo is simply odious. The so-called "Village" is a traitorous group of narcissistic arrogant imbecilic destroyers who most probably all beliong in prison somewhere (in a good old circa 1950s Red China re-education program...)

who will rid us of these swine?

I think bloggers are trying, neill.

They've been doing it for years, ever since Franklin Graham took control. How else explain all those neocons on the editorial pages? All we have now is written confirmation, and the rather lame bluff they can get the same access to the new White House they had to the old. Forget Milbank, what do you think we'll hear from Andy Alexander? Hopefully, it'll be right before he packs up and goes back to Dayton.

"Indeed, it's a rather dramatic breach of journalistic ethics and has the potential to do lasting damage to the Washington Post's credibility."

What credibility??? Next you will say that the Post is part of the liberal media! The Washington Post keeps becoming more and more a window for neocons to display their perverted view of the world and the amerikan role in it.

Today's Post views from the Reich-Wing:
- John Bolton calling for an Israeli attack on Iran.
- Someone I have never heard of supporting military coups over democracy in Central America.

Wow, and was the Obama Admin on board with this scheme? I'm kind of doubtful, seems like the Post is really desperate at this point. Like, really. Wonder what Howard Kurtz will say about this, but if he still works for the Post then it would be another conflict of interest.
Folks like him seem more concerned about how the internet is infringing on the Villagers' precious territory.

Novak used to do this, too: it was a business sideline.

non-confrontational access to "those powerful few" — Obama administration officials, members of Congress, and the paper's own reporters and editors.

Sounds like a coctail party invitation to me. Seriously, who would send out a flier with the intent that Mike Allen infers. I'd be more interested in knowing what that price range means. Somehow, I can't believe it costs $25,000 to talk to Dan Balz.

So the Post is selling access at $25K a pop to the same reporters it requires to provide Internet chat access to people for free.
Sound business plan.

Pimpin ain't easy, but the WaPo is committed to being the biggest, baddest, flashiest pimp in DC. It's calling on all of its ho's (reporters, editors, congresscritters, and administration officials) to, "Get out there and get my money, Bitches!"

it is truly amazing -- truly incredible -- the arrogant blindness is so un-self-conscious. i hate to move to bloggin irrevelance so quickly, but all they really need are the uniforms...

it's really not even ideology -- just business, and they have absolutely no decency. they're all chuck colsons who would throw his grandmother under a bus for dick nixon back in the day. they are so unconsciously ludicrous they are morphing into a purely socio-pathological ruling class.

i read shit like this RE the WaPo and I am heartsick about this country for days... happy Fourth to all you other suckers out there...

that nimrod south carolina guv really caint even hold a candle to these freaks.

Totally dubious and I smell a rat. If it's true, or even half-true, it's blockbuster.

If the Obama administration is playing along with this, then that is a bigger problem than the Washington Post.

Is there any question now as to why Dan Froomkin's WHWatch was dumped?//

> It went out before it was properly vetted, and
> this draft does not represent what the company’s
> vision for these dinners are, which is meant to
> be an independent, policy-oriented event for
> newsmakers. As written, the newsroom could not
> participate in an event like this."

So? Are the events taking place anyway, with or without the newsroom? Are Obama Administration officials participating? How do ordinary Citizens who don't have $250,000 to drop get to speak to Administration officials on a "collegial" basis?

What is sad is that this is considered a possibility. If this is a hoax, which I suspect it is, the fact that we are writing as if it were true is the revelation.

It will be very difficult for the WaPo to deny this allegation with so many believing it is possible.

I am committed to Oneness through Justice and Transformation
peace,
st john

MSM, bought and paid for by the Rethugs. They lie and the MSM repeats it and makes it the truth for the ignorant. Fox News next?

Of course, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. The post's response deserves the same treatment that Milbank gave Pitney's explanation.

Milbank ignored it and continued to assume the worst. Why does the Post deserve to be taken at their word when the facts indicate otherwise?

The flyer was delivered. How is it a "draft" when it's been delivered?

Is the newspaper delivered to my doorstep a "draft"?

Smith is trying to hide between a distinction without a difference. One of the sad realities about the news business in general is that over the last few years any firewall between newsrooms and business divisions in newspapers across the country (if they ever really existed)have fallen away. In these days of short business cycles and shareholders ever increasing appetite for dividends, everybody who works for a newspaper understands that it is always about the bottom line.

"As written, the newsroom could not participate in an event like this."
Sounds like they want to whitewash these things better.

"Behind," not "between."

Froomkin has got to be somewhat happy to be leaving that cesspool.

My wife cancelled her Sunday Only WaPo subscription over Froomkin's termination. Now I am even more proud of her. What a worthless and disturbing stain on the District and the Nation the WaPo is.

@Chris, #1: Thank G-d, and thank you, that the very first post here says what should have been included in Benen's item -- a recognition that IF -- and that's a big, bold "if" there -- anyone at all in the Obama administration was a willing party to this, then it's an absolute betrayal of everything for which we voted (and in so many cases, worked fingers to the bone, gave more than they could afford, etcetcetc). It would be far worse, imho, than even the administration's failures to prosecute war crimes, bring the full American system of justice to those accused of being "enemy combatants," seriously regulate the financial industry, support full gay equality, and all the other "delayed" (or broken) promises. (It would also be about the stupidest thing the admin could do politically -- worse than the proverbial "dead girl / live boy" in the Lincoln bedroom.)
I really hope there's zero -- Kelvin zero -- reality behind at least that part of the story, and that ericfree's take on it is correct.
G-d willing, insh'Allah, etcetc.

SteveA:

MSM, bought and paid for by the Rethugs.

Steve, I think you need to read the whole post. It's Democrats, not Republicans:

... an "exclusive Washington Post Salon," at which they will be able to "interact" with "key" Obama administration officials, congressional leaders....

an independent, policy-oriented event for newsmakers.

What a bizarre "official response". The WaPo is sponsoring a newsmaking event that it's reporters can't attend? They might have mentioned what the money was for.

"It went out before it was properly vetted, and this draft does not represent what the company’s vision for these dinners are, which is meant to be an independent, policy-oriented event for newsmakers."

Right, and that is what lobbyists and association executives were supposed to be paying $25,000 to $250,000 for?

"One of the sad realities about the news business in general is that over the last few years any firewall between newsrooms and business divisions in newspapers across the country (if they ever really existed)have fallen away. In these days of short business cycles and shareholders ever increasing appetite for dividends, everybody who works for a newspaper understands that it is always about the bottom line."

It may sound like a distinction without a difference, but I would argue that the firewall is still there, it's just only there for the people who actually write the news. It isn't there for the highest leadership, who make speeches to the newsroom about standards of journalistic excellence and then make speeches to the sales people about the bottom line. Not everybody thinks it's all about the bottom line; but this makes it clear that at the WaPo, somebody's operating on that premise.

When I worked for a trade magazine, the situation was similar. I was an editor, and I and the other editors all bought the "it's all about great content" line that the publisher delivered, and probably even meant. But then we would hear of deals that the sales people had engineered, without telling us, which had conflict of interest but also big dollar signs written all over them. WaPo reporters are probably hearing the same double message -- half of it, anyway -- and will end up with their credibility tarnished without ever having known what the sales division was up to.

That said, this incident is just clearer evidence than ever that the day of the newspaper is past. Only publications that don't have to meet Wall Street revenue targets can afford to deliver on the promise of honest content that readers actually want or need without having to make the side deals that compromise that content.

This would mean the Obama admin is colluding with the WaPo on this.

The Obama people are smarter than that, I hope.

ericfree: You're thinking of Donald Graham. Franklin Graham is Billy's son and desihnated successor.

You know, if the WaPo needs money that bad, it could put Fred Hiatt, its opinion writers, and half of its reporters in dunking booths and charge people $1000.00 a throw.

'lasting damage to the Washinton Post's credibility'
I didn't know they had any credibility left - Who knew?

If the Obama administration is playing along with this, then that is a bigger problem than the Washington Post.

It depends on how honest the Post was with them about what this "conference" was supposed to entail. Government officials attend conferences all the time to discuss policy on the environment, health care, etc. Apparently there were representatives from the administration at the Personal Democracy Forum talking about new open government computer initiatives.

If the administration knew that industry executives were going to pay a minimum of $25,000 for access to them and went along with it then, yes, that's bad. Very bad. If they were told that the Post was sponsoring a conference but not told that the conference was being limited to a specific group of executives, the issue is that the Post was not being honest, not that the administration would agree to participate in a conference.

Why is it that the phrases "Washington Post" and "journalistic ethics" never appear in the same sentence without the additional word "breach?"

Also note that the Post was promising access to "members of Congress" in addition to its own reporters. If this is a scandal, it's going to be pretty widespread and most likely hit both parties.

This one sounds like politics rhetoric.

What a disappointment is Donald Graham -- here is a guy who served in the military, was a DC cop for a short stint -- and whose mother was the amazing Katharine Graham -- and his commitment rather than to a quality news organization or to integrity has apparently been to the decline and debasement of this great institution.

Just don't get how he turned out to be such a meretricious loser.

ericfree:
It's Don Graham. Franklin Graham is the son of Billy Graham(Yes, the televangelist). I don't believe Don is related to Franklin or Billy in any way.

I think this poorly worded memo gets to the meaning of the word "networking." All the Washington-focused publications hold these kind of events in some fashion, whether they call them "panels," "conferences," "breakfasts," "lunches," "awards ceremonies," "trade shows," or even "golf tournaments." For many of these organizations, as the news function gets eaten away by bloggers and advertising goes down the tubes events are the only profitable activity left.

If whoever wrote the WAPO memo had instead promoted a "networking event" there wouldn't be this controversey.

A newspaper that prints column after column after column in which a partisan Republican, second-rate sportswriter repetitively cuts and pastes ExxonMobil-funded global warming denialist lies and pseudo-scientific sophistry which the paper's own reporters have shown to be false, while the editor defends the sportswriter's deliberate, repeated lies as an "important contribution to the debate" has no credibility.

'Steve, I think you need to read the whole post. It's Democrats, not Republicans" Sorry if I hurt a Rethug's feelings. I was repeating a post I have stated for some time now and did not mean to insult anyone. It is becoming apparent that I need to change the language to " MSM, bought and paid for by whomever resides in Washington"

"As written, the newsroom could not participate in an event like this."

Great. So they're going to hustle the lobbyists to pay money for access, then not provide the access. Can you say "bait and switch"?

As Atrios likes to say: Time for another blogger ethics panel.

"properly vetter" = we forgot to take out the part about the money.

The only way something like this could turn out "fair" would be to invite an equal number of participants from the public(i.e. those unable to pay) to also attend and have their voices heard on an equal basis. Otherwise this stinks to high h311.

Since when did lobbyists need an intermediary to connect with politicians. And why would they pay the wapo for access when all they have to do is pick up the phone and call their favorite congressman/woman?

Obama better send out a memo to his *administration* and tell them they are fired if they sign on for this scheme.

Didn't Dana Milbank just lecture Nico Pitney about "working in collusion" with the administration? His column on these "salons" ought to be a doozy. I can't wait to read it.

Well, it'd appear in the Post, so I won't. But it'll be interesting to see if Milbank will write one at all. After his high dudgeon over Pitney's non-collusion, having the WaPo management decide to graduate its staff from -- excuse the sexist language, please -- sluts to whores is hardly something one can excuse with vague handwaving about "not properly vetted" after the Post is caught with its hand in the cookie jar.

Some day I might tell my children about when the had credibility, but by then I'll also be telling my children about when there was a Post.

So the Post is selling access at $25K a pop to the same reporters it requires to provide Internet chat access to people for free. Sound business plan.

The difference is they pay to not have to wade through criticism by the DFHs.

This brings to mind the treatment, or lack of, with regard to Gov. Sanford's daliance with another woman/women than his wife. The religious conservatives who have clearly spoken against adultery, are silent on this person's behavior. The hypocrisy is screaming at us, and the MSM makes no issue of it. Don't wait for Dana to say anything that throws a light on this issue. He has already stated his position and needs no further comment. How could he?

I am committed to Oneness through Justice and Transformation
peace,
st john

penalcolony@11:59: Thanks for the correction. Realized the mistake after I left home, much too late. Still, Franklin Graham's control of the Post would explain a lot. I'm just happy for Andy Alexander's reaction; there's still some integrity there after all.

"Also note that the Post was promising access to "members of Congress" in addition to its own reporters. If this is a scandal, it's going to be pretty widespread and most likely hit both parties."
I don't see who's going to be scandalized by lobbyists getting access to pols. It's not like they have difficulty doing so now.

I think pj in jebusland and Ron Byers have it sniffed out pretty well. This sounds like the business division selling a conference or roundtable notion, banking on the WaPo's name and ability to create a "neutral territory" where the lobbyists will pay a sponsorship fee (ergo the $25k-$250k range) and get to position themselves as concerned citizens hoping to "debate" healthcare topics with the machers in the Obama admin. Obama's folks will be invited for free and some will probably attend so they can get their message to the lobbyists in a safe environment. Sure, it could be unseemly. It might be unethical. But I've seen it dozens of times in the non-profit world.

It might also be a good way to get the word out with inviting the vampires into their home.

Don't get your knickers in a twist. There are many reasons to lament the death of quality at WaPo (Keeping Kurtz? Firing Froomkin?) but this isn't one of them.

Most every publication has a conference branche that sells sponsored events featuring appealing guests. The Aspen/Atlantic Ideas Festival is one such event. Politico and all of its brethren buy tables at the White House Correspondents dinner to host advertisers. "Editorial Roundtables" are common. The Post may be guilty of ill-considered brochure copy, but this is no major revelation.

Hello everyone. Some people make headlines while others make history. Help me! Looking for sites on: Sights for paintball guns. I found only this - blue Paintball guns. Ammunition and hunting accessories for the hunter and sportsman. Smart parts released a few more paintball guns into their product line. Waiting for a reply :mad:, Darrin from Afghanistan.