'...an impressive feat of journalism by a Washington outsider who seemed to know more about what was going on in Washington than most insiders did; 2) Obama’s failure to fire McChrystal months ago for both his arrogance and incompetence was a grievous mistake that illuminates a wider management shortfall at the White House; 3) The present strategy has produced no progress in this nearly nine-year-old war, even as the monthly coalition body count has just reached a new high.
There were few laughs in the 36 hours of tumult, but Jon Stewart captured them with a montage of cable-news talking heads expressing repeated shock that an interloper from a rock ’n’ roll magazine could gain access to the war command and induce it to speak with self-immolating candor. Politico theorized that Hastings had pulled off his impertinent coup because he was a freelance journalist rather than a beat reporter, and so could risk “burning bridges by publishing many of McChrystal’s remarks.”
That sentence was edited out of the article — in a routine updating, said Politico — after the blogger Andrew Sullivan highlighted it as a devastating indictment of a Washington media elite too cozy with and protective of its sources to report the unvarnished news. In any event, Politico had the big picture right. It’s the Hastings-esque outsiders with no fear of burning bridges who have often uncovered the epochal stories missed by those with high-level access. Woodward and Bernstein were young local reporters, nowhere near the White House beat, when they cracked Watergate. Seymour Hersh was a freelancer when he broke My Lai. It was uncelebrated reporters in Knight Ridder’s Washington bureau, not journalistic stars courted by Scooter and Wolfowitz, who mined low-level agency hands to challenge the “slam-dunk” W.M.D. intelligence in the run-up to Iraq.
Symbolically enough, Hastings was reporting his McChrystal story abroad just as Beltway media heavies and their most bold-faced subjects were dressing up for the annual White House correspondents’ dinner. Rolling Stone has never bought a table or thrown an afterparty for that bacchanal, and it has not even had a Washington bureau since the mid-1970s. Yet the magazine has not only chronicled the McChrystal implosion — and relentlessly tracked the administration’s connections to the “vampire squid” of Goldman Sachs — but has also exposed the shoddy management of the Obama Interior Department. As it happens, the issue of Rolling Stone with the Hastings story also contains a second installment of Tim Dickinson’s devastating dissection of the Ken Salazar cohort, this time detailing how its lax regulation could soon lead to an even uglier repeat of the Gulf of Mexico fiasco when BP and Shell commence offshore drilling in the Arctic Ocean.
How embarrassing and telling when the frothing, fickle media fixated on two insignificant interlopers who crashed a WH state dinner. And NBC made stars out of the star-fucking, vapid, one-dimensional self-promoters.

They still are not reporting on the fact that Holebrooke, Eikenberry & Biden are pulling in the opposite direction as the U.S. Military - the one that is under the comand of President Obama. McChrystal had a legitimate gripe. The Rolling Stone article made something stick out "Starkly". That the Civilian side was undermining McChrystal, and his counter insurgency startegy - This is Obama's War, if you undermine McChrystal, you undermine Obama. They are all supposed to be on the same page, singing the same tune. When is the President going to send a message to the Civilian side of the equation - who aren't pulling in the same direction? I hope Patraeus makes Eikenberry's life hell - paybacks a bitch.
ReplyDeleteI am not surprised the leftys are piling on now after the fact, but really making out like Rolling Stone is like some kind of gold standard in Journalism that's going a bit far. Did they get a look at the cover of that edition of Rolling Stone?
This is a funny video.
http://youhavetobethistalltogoonthisride.blogspot.com/2010/06/red-state-update-obama-you-cant-play.html
It is rather funny that the two (arguably) biggest stories in recent history were done by The National Enquirer (Edwards) and Rolling Stone. That's gotta make the "real" journalists feel pretty foolish doesn't it?
ReplyDeleteMarty,
ReplyDeleteI "love" this story (the way cats love mice!) Anyway, more and more I realize why I never gravitated toward news n my career; I guess I wanted to make an honest living. I feel like posting this on a few newspaper buddy's Facebook wall.
You make a great point, Tim!
ReplyDeleteThe media BC - Before Cable - had legions more integrity than what's out there now.
ReplyDeleteGood bye to the Main Stream Media...... Until they grow some balls.
ReplyDeleteFuggedaboudit!
ReplyDelete