When the framers of the Constitution wrote the following, they thought they were being pretty clear, pretty definitive:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
What they didn’t foresee was that freedom of the press was purely optional:
According to Politico’s Mike Allen, the WaPo has begun offering a new service — matching up lobbyists with administration officials for face time, or whatever else the client has in mind. Like any pimp, er, business manager, they’re not offering it for free, either:
For $25,000 to $250,000, The Washington Post is offering lobbyists and association executives off the record, non-confrontational access to “those powerful few” — Obama administration officials, members of Congress, and the paper’s own reporters and editors.
The astonishing offer is detailed in a flier circulated Wednesday to a health-care lobbyist, who provided it to a reporter because the lobbyist said he feels it’s a conflict for the paper to charge for access to, as the flier says, its “health care reporting and editorial staff.”
The offer—which essentially turns a news organization into a facilitator for private lobbyist-official encounters—is a new sign of the lengths to which news organizations will go to find revenue at a time when most newspapers are struggling for survival.
A facilitator! That’s certainly more pleasant than “pimp”. I prefer the Night Shift term “love broker,” which reasonably applies between lobbyists and the White House — and for that matter, between the press and the White House, too.
…
In response to requests for comment, The Post issued a statement that stopped short of canceling the event.
Kris Coratti, communications director of Washington Post Media, a division of The Washington Post Company, said: “The flier circulated this morning came out of a business division for conferences and events, and the newsroom was unaware of such communication. 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. We do believe there is an opportunity to have a conferences and events business, and that The Post should be leading these conversations in Washington, big or small, while maintaining journalistic integrity. The newsroom will participate where appropriate.”
Huh? If the Post has a lucrative side business that depends on access to the Obama White House, that’s what undermines their journalistic integrity, not whether the news room knew about the program or participates in the events. This just confirms that the Post has decided to act as a pimp to connect “newsmakers” and those seeking influence.
I had to let Ed Morrissey have his say because he said it so well.
It occurs to me that for the media themselves they see reporting the truth as their last job. Rather, they are in the business of selling news. (That’s hardly controversial.)
My thinking goes that just as they are motivated by profit to sell the Obama administration (as Chris Matthews freely admitted), so they were motivated by profit to trash the Bush administration. In both cases, there is a story to be sold, not told, and there is strong disincentive to report the truth.
Open up your history books, boys and girls, and tear out the page on which the Bill of Rights appears. We won’t be using it for a while.
UPDATE
You’re nicked!
Washington Post Publisher Katharine Weymouth today canceled plans for a series of policy dinners at her home after learning that marketing fliers offered lobbyists access to Obama administration officials, members of Congress and Post journalists in exchange for payments as high as $250,000.
“Absolutely, I’m disappointed,” Weymouth, the chief executive of Washington Post Media, said in an interview. “This should never have happened. The fliers got out and weren’t vetted. They didn’t represent at all what we were attempting to do. We’re not going to do any dinners that would impugn the integrity of the newsroom.”
Moments earlier, Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli said in a separate interview that he was “appalled” by the plan and had insisted before the cancellation that the newsroom would not participate.
“It suggests that access to Washington Post journalists was available for purchase,” Brauchli said.
“Suggests”? Your own publisher admits she’s disappointed only because she got caught.
I wouldn’t worry, however, WaPo. No one thinks the New York Times is any more legit. You’re in very good company—for what you do.