Yesterday in my sign-off post I noted that the Washington Free Beacon had already hit rock bottom by posting an “article” (unbylined, as it happens) making a big deal out of a few misogynist names among the 1261 on the Twitter “following” list of an Obama campaign staffer. I mean, really, that’s pretty pathetic. But it’s also sadly typical for a publication that began life so recently with at least a bit of resume power and a whole lot of bully-boy swagger.
Anyway, Paul Waldman at TAP has already penned the Free Beacon’s obituary as a serious publication, unless it changes its ways drastically:
This is the Breitbartization of journalism, in which the only goal is to embarrass liberals, because, you know, screw you, hippie. Conservatives cry a lot about bias in the media, and every once in a while, they say, “We’ll show you! We’ll start our own news organizations, and they’ll show everyone the real news the liberal media won’t tell you! Not only that, this won’t be just a bunch of conservatives calling people names. It’ll be real journalism!” And then this is the best they can come up with.
I hope that I (and you, dear reader) are not guilty of liking the sort of puerile crap the Free Beacon publishes if it comes from people who agree with my politics. Nothing this bad on the Left comes to mind—certainly nothing that enjoyed the kind of hype that site did when it was launched.
And apparently money, according to Conor Friedersdorf, who observes:
So there you go, conservatives. Aren’t you glad your elites inside the beltway have decided to finance this “combat journalism”? How would you possibly compete in the public arena without paying twenty and thirty-somethings better-than-journalist salaries to do this kind of work?
If there was money being showered on Free Beacon editor Matthew Continetti, he would have been better off using it to buy media influence with free bacon.
Feed the Political AnimalDonate
Washington Monthly depends on donations from readers like you.