Political Press = Sore Losers [WPost whining]

The Boston Herald ^ | 4/29/04 | David Guarino

[Gothmog]

Funny what a difference a week makes in the world of the political press.

Our friends at the Washington Post write breathlessly this morning about leaks that led to the latest controversy over John Kerry's Vietnam War medals. As you no doubt recall, ABC and The New York Times reported Monday on an old videotape unearthed which shows Kerry saying decisively that he tossed his "medals" over the wall at Congress in protest with his anti-war brothers in arms. Of course, it later turned out Kerry tossed only the ribbons, not his medals.

There were no doubts the story was leaked by someone who dislikes Kerry - getting it in ABC and The Times on the same day gave that away. But The Post, quoting its own unnamed sources, tries to mute the scoop by saying the whole thing came from the Republican National Committee.

First point: So what! Who cares where the story came from, it was absolutely newsworthy and, even if Kerry hadn't completely flubbed his response to it, the video deserved to be a two- or three-day event.

But what is shameful about the Post is they are so clearly sore losers. Whoever outed the tape - and odds are it was the RNC - decided to give it to The Post's biggest national competitor, The Times. So The Post's reaction is to try to undercut the story by questioning the source of the tape.

But where was such detailed introspection a week before when The Post took a direct feed from the Kerry campaign for an exclusive first look at the long-awaited list of lobbyists Kerry met with over the years? As previously discussed here, The Post clearly took a Kerry-favorable tilt on that story by honing in immediately on Kerry using the list's "unprecedented" release to hammer Bush's secretive energy task force meetings.

Anyone even remotely connected to the press or political world knows leaks are a reality in government and campaigns. I've long been in the camp that embraces dropped dimes - without them, the government and campaigns get more comforted and less afflicted.

As usual, when all else fails or a reporter gets beat, the media covers - and feeds off of - itself. And we wonder why our reputation is a notch below trial lawyers and auto dealers.

[Semper Paratus]

The liberal media rules book on government leaks is if leak embarasses republicans it doesn't matter where it came from or if it's even accurate, publish/broadcast it.
If the leak embarasses 'rats don't publish/broadcast it and hammer the leaker.

Example CBS news this morning asking the DOJ to remove the Gorelick memos from it's website instead of reporting about what they say.

[OpusatFR]

I'm still trying to understand why the media didn't make an issue of Clinton's dodging the draft by fleeing to England and demonstrating over there against the troops when Bob Dole, a horrifically injured medal (and had ribbons too!) honoree was running against him.

Apparently, Clinton was viewed as capable of running a military despite his lack of service.

Bob Dole was injured in ways that are not superficial.

[sr4402]

Whoever outed the tape - and odds are it was the RNC

Stop the tape. Call the Spin Doctor. The RNC gave the tape to the New York Times and ABC? And the NYT and ABC obligingly ran it to smear Kerry? Whoa, NYT and ABC is an arm of the Republican National Committee? Call the Spin Doctor, this reporter needs to have his head examined.

LOLARMAO!

[KellyAdmirer]

Yes, it doesn't make sense, the RNC wouldn't go through those outlets. What I am thinking is that either ABC or the NY Times had the tape for a while, but only put it out when it found out that the other outlet also had it and was ready to release it. The Times in particular likes to sit on stories unfavorable to their guy.

I think another liberal - Clinton, Dean, Nader - are as likely sources for this as the Republicans.