Posted on 02/03/2004 11:25:22 PM PST by JohnHuang2
Still slamming WND
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
I thought the whole issue of WorldNetDaily's press credentials was over and done with.
I didn't think I would ever have to talk about this issue again.
For me, I would prefer to discuss the great issues of the day rather than revisit the petty political shenanigans of a clique of self-serving journalists with no respect for the new media and a free press.
But here we go again.
The most recent issue of the Online Journalism Review, a publication of the well-endowed USC Annenberg School of Journalism, has raised the issue once more.
And, in the process, a former member of the Standing Committee of Correspondents, charged by the U.S. Senate with policing credentials for reporters covering the nation's Capitol, has lied about WorldNetDaily.
Since I wasn't asked to address the issue in the article, I will use this space to set the record straight.
James Kuhnhenn, a reporter in Knight Ridder's Washington bureau, who voted twice to deny WorldNetDaily credentials, reasserted the committee's initial, erroneous and, frankly, defamatory contention that WorldNetDaily had some vague connection with some vague, unspecified "advocacy group."
Nothing could be further from the truth. This lie was demonstrated time and time again to the committee – both in person, on the telephone and in writing. Yet this argument continues to be made – now by a former member of the committee.
Why is this a big deal?
Because it is a blatant attempt to justify and rationalize the committee's arbitrary and capricious denial of credentials to WorldNetDaily with deceit.
WorldNetDaily has never been associated with any advocacy group. WorldNetDaily never will be associated with any advocacy group.
Once upon a time, WorldNetDaily was part of a non-profit organization, the Western Journalism Center. There is no longer any association between the two corporations – one for profit and the other non-profit. They are completely independent – different leadership, different board members, different modes of support.
Further, Western Journalism Center, founded by me, has never been an advocacy group. The only thing it advocates is good journalism.
But all of this important history is muddled in the report in the Online Journalism Review and particularly in the statements reportedly made by Kuhnhenn, who betrays his own ongoing animus and bitterness toward WorldNetDaily.
"'They established to our satisfaction that they have firewalls between their editorial content and the funding' contributed by the advocacy group, says Kuhnhenn, who was sitting on the committee at the time," the article says.
There has never been any funding of WorldNetDaily from any advocacy group. Nor does Western Journalism Center, a non-profit, tax-exempt investigative reporting outfit, contribute any funding to WorldNetDaily.
Why I should have to continue wasting time and energy refuting these lies after all this time, I cannot understand.
What I will say is this: Any journalist who is so sloppy in making these kinds of unfounded accusations against colleagues cannot be trusted to report the news fairly. That's right. I'm talking about you, Kuhnhenn.
The article concludes by suggesting the standing committee finally made a determination to award WorldNetDaily press credentials after realizing we met all the criteria. Let me assure you the committee learned we met all the criteria two years before it awarded WorldNetDaily credentials.
The committee finally awarded WorldNetDaily credentials after we threatened to file a massive, multi-million dollar First Amendment lawsuit against the committee and the individuals on it for their flagrant abuse of their power and authority.
I hope I don't have to explain this again.
Because while you're doing so, you're not doing something else. And what you are doing, you might do sloppily because you're distracted and annoyed.
Don't think that they don't plan these press assaults well in advance. In this leaked memo to Tony Blair from 2001, an aide went to Washington, DC, to study how the Clinton administration planned their press release a year in advance. I don't believe for a minute that this type of planning has ceased in the DNC.
-PJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.