The thing is, the left blahgerz have serious envy over the Dan Rather and Eason Jordan stories and they are trying to make much more of this than it is. The culpability of the White House is merely that they were calling on a friendly reporter for questions. I’ve read lefty blahgers trying to say Bush is involved with a male prostitute.

I don’t really think Kos expects harsher vetting of the press corps. His point seems to be that they should harshly vet the reporters who ask softball questions. If this guy was a regular media liberal hack, Kos would have no problem with the guy, gay prostitute or not. He’s taking cheap shots at the Administration over a guy whose only real affiliation with George Bush is that he asked the guy a few easy questions. That’s a pretty lame hit. You aren’t going to start racking up scalps that way. You look weak and ineffectual.

They excuse it with “what if it were a lefty, imagine the hell raised!” Well that dog won’t hunt. They look hypocritical and petty in this entire episode: the guy is gone, he’s small potatoes, and do you really want all the White House Press Corps to go through FBI and Secret Service background checks of their _personal lives_ before they get a pass? I think the answer is obvious. I guess you play the hand you are dealt. Keep beating the Gannon drum lefties, its all you got. You just look kind of stupid doing it.

and Captain’s Quarters blogged about it here: http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/003841.php

Some people are born to take center stage and some are not, and if a smart gal thinks she belongs there, and has shown that she’s got the goods to be a player, more power to her! LaShawn’s ambition sometimes all but crackles off the page, but in a good and refreshing way – it is up-front and honest enough to occasionally say, “Hey, look, I’m working hard over here, and I want the brass ring, and I’d appreciate it if you folks would link to me!” I recall her post with the tiara, which shows that she has her head on right and has a sense of humor about it all – and a sense of humor is important. Keep your eyes on the prize, kid. Keep looking at Jesus, too!

Of course someone who’s looking for that Big Break hopes that they’ll get the attention that makes them a name in journalism. It’s normal and expected. It’s exactly the same impulse that drove Woodward and Bernstein during their Watergate coverage. It’s the same impulse that drive CNN to their bogus Tailhook coverage and Mary Mapes to swallow those ginned-up documents.

It’s pretty much the first rule of journalism: if you want to get big, you have to take down someone big. That rule is very nearly universal (though, yes, a few have done it other ways).

I think it’s completely appropriate that LaShawn chase the biggest stories she can find and report them with all the energy and tenacity she has. That’s how careers are made.

Anyone who derides that hasn’t been paying much attention to journalism over the last bazillion years.

I don’t believe this is what you are about. But since so many of the elite MSM journalists behave this way (and have the hack books and lecture fees and talk shows to prove it), they will not hesitate to assume you are behaving the same way. Journalists are cynics, knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing, as Oscar Wilde said.

Next point: I think this story is nowhere near finished. Trouble is, the easy part is done. Consider: I think it fair to say that you think Jordan’s assertions about the US military targeting journalists are so much bunk (add your own noun if you don’t think “bunk” is strong enough.) I think they’re bunk myself. But millions of people will not, millions living in the Middle East, to say nothing of those in the US who could not pass a rabies nor an IQ test. I think it most likely that the withheld videotape will soon surface in the Arab media as “proof” that the US murders those who try to tell this “truth”.

First Assignment: A close watch needs to be kept of the Arab media for just such eruptions. Even if the videotape does not surface, reactions of the “See we told you so” variety from whoever in the Middle East would be valuable, if only to see how far this poison has gotten. The Middle East media Research Institute (MEMRI) (www.memri.org) and its offshoots would be the place to start.

Next: Three years ago, if you had told me that any US soldier would torture prisioners of war, and for sadistic ends, I would have laughed at you. Abu Gharib was a sobering wake up. It does not matter that I (and I believe, you, too) think that Jordan’s assertions are bunk. They need to be investigated to the ends of the earth. If even one instance is true, it will blow the lid off. It may be argued that this is wartime, and such revelations would aid the enemy. I can understand this view, but disagree with it completely. AL-JAZEERA will be investigating these rumors if no one else will. Should AL-JAZEERA find that the horrible is true, the lid will be blown off even harder than if “our side” reveals it. Even if the results are negative, and no journalist has been deliberately killed, it would be useful to have a definitive investigation, if only to have it ready to knock down propaganda from the other side.

To do this, I think

a) the videotape needs to be released. It seems likely to me, though I have no way to prove it) that CNN executives had a chance to see it, and they fired Jordan preemptively. If they can see it, why not the rest of the world? I am underimpressed with the “off the record” assertions I have heard. I’ve always thought that the way to keep something off the record was NOT TO MAKE A DAM RECORD.

b) Jordan and his supporters need to be pressed on all the allegations they made.

Trouble is, this will take a lot of work, highlighting a big weakness of the blogosphere: a lack of resources that are necessary to complete such a task. This videotape will not be found using Google. Someone will have to track it down, and wheedle it out, or find a “deep Throat” willing to provide it. Daunting? You bet. It is a challenge I wish Hugh Hewitt would take up. Having made a fair amount of money being an interpreter of blogs, a lot of experience as a journalist, and more contacts than 98% of the blogosphere, he would seem to be ideally suited. Yet it might make him swallow, and who can blame him. Should he get the tape and release it, he will be blasted, not just today, but for years. Blacklists will form, he will be gouged for any tiny mistake. Can I prove this? Negatively: what have you seen in the top twenty news sources on verifying Jordan’s assertions? The stakes are too high. The likely result of any such investigation would be that Jordan is careless at best, a liar and a prize swine at worst (with the worst being miles more likely.) Such a finding would hit too close to home. Jordan’s attitude fits Katherine Seelye or Howard Kurtz or John Carroll or Dan Rather or—well you get the point—much better than an objective look at the facts—and what the MSM has done to the facts.

I realize this blog is yours, and you must run it as you see fit. But I hope what I have written is worth thinking about—and acting on.

Many thanks for taking the time to read this enormous post.

Sincerely yours,
Gregory Koster

I want to personally thank you for all of the information you afforded us (lesser known) bloggers. Because of you I was able to get more information than I certainly would have extrapolated from the MSM.

I can’t say it enough: I am liberal and I found this story to be shockingly under-reported (and reported WAY late, at that). Thank you for providing comprehensive coverage of all the sources on the internet, in general, and the blogosphere, in particular.

Personally, I’m upset more of my liberal friends didn’t report on this turn of events with Jordan. Perhaps it wasn’t so much my liberal politics as it was the staunch defense of my (soon-to-be?) profession as a journalist. Like I said on my blog, journalism should know no biases. Unfortunately, it does.

Again, great job on the coverage.

Now…back to substitute teaching my second graders!