David Carr has really hit the nail on the head with his latest:
The larger sense I get from the criticism directed at Mr. Assange and Mr. Greenwald is one of distaste — that they aren’t what we think of as real journalists. Instead, they represent an emerging Fifth Estate composed of leakers, activists and bloggers who threaten those of us in traditional media. They are, as one says, not like us.
“By no means was I treated as a hero when I first came forward. I was indicted and spent two years in court,” Mr. Ellsberg said in an interview. “But in those days, journalists were not turning on journalists. With Snowden in particular, you have a split between truly independent journalists and those who are tools — and I mean that in every sense of the term — of the government. Toobin and Grunwald are doing the work of the government to maintain relationships and access.”
Because editor Bill Keller would rather bury his paper’s own accomplishments than admit that Julian Assange and his organization conduct proper journalism, that’s why. Forbes‘ Andy Greenberg blogged today about the curious absence of Wikileaks reporting in yesterday’s Pulitzer Prize ceremonies:
Continue reading Why wouldn’t the New York Times promote its own reporting?
Bill Keller is the executive editor of The New York Times. On Wednesday, January 26, his article for the Magazine, “Dealing with Assange and the WikiLeaks Secrets,” was published, detailing the behind-the-scenes process of his newspaper’s collaboration and eventual falling-out with the enigmatic vigilante journalist.
Keller’s implicit message, however, was impossible to miss: Julian Assange is a reckless, harmful individual whose self-delusion and visions of grandeur belied his inability to produce real journalism — a task which, of course, is ostensibly exactly what The New York Times does on a regular basis.
Except for when it doesn’t. As I read Keller’s piece, I was often astonished at his utter lack of introspection — from both a personal and professional perspective — as well as his defense of some very questionable decisions made by him and his staff. Here, below, are a few of my thoughts, in no particular order: Continue reading Hard to believe, but the NYT hates being upstaged by Julian Assange
As per today’s New York Times, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange had this to say about allegations of sexual wrongdoing: “On Friday, he told the BBC that the case presented in the London courts was ‘a smear attempt,’ and that the impending publication of the Swedish police documents amounted to ‘another smear attempt.'”
This is a bit odd. Julian Assange thinks the publication of, well, something is actually negative. And yet, thanks to him, we are now privy to such pertinent information as the fact that Colonel Muammar al-Qaddafi’s ever-present personal nurse is a “voluptuous blonde.” I mean, someone’s got to report on this stuff.
And speaking of odd…um, Joe Lieberman appears to have located his long-lost set of morals. This has been a strange last few days.
Just when I thought all hope was lost, a real, live politician in the United States House of Representatives made a reasoned, responsible statement today. I’d almost forgotten that’s what they were there to do. Anyway, it was John Conyers (D-MI), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, who, in his opening remarks, said the only thing that made sense, which is the following (as found here, with slight edits): Continue reading A specter is haunting Congress — the specter of rational thinking