Scandal Puts Focus On Role of Bloggers (WaPo on FR, NCPAC and MD4Bush)

Washington Post ^ | 02/11/05 | David Snyder and Matthew Mosk

[conservative in nyc]

The Web site began as a sort of Internet boutique for like-minded conservatives and libertarians, suspicious of federal power and angry at President Bill Clinton.

Started in 1997 by a reclusive California conservative, freerepublic.com saw its membership blossom with Clinton's impeachment and the election of George W. Bush. Attention to the site reached a zenith last fall, when a "freeper" -- the group's moniker for its bloggers -- first discussed flaws in documents CBS News used in a report critical of Bush's National Guard service.

---Snip---

One participant working under the handle MD4BUSH, whose identity is unknown, drew Steffen into a private conversation and appeared to coax him to share more details about his role in spreading the rumor. Copies of those chat room e-mails were later provided to The Washington Post.

The Oct. 18 conversation began with MD4BUSH complimenting Steffen and saying how obvious it was that the rumors about the mayor were true. Steffen, writing under the name NCPAC, replied:

"I don't look for the MO'M [O'Malley] story to hit for a little bit yet. . . . However, a lot of what everyone knows about MO'M is because of work that has occurred. It's been a wild ride."

MD4BUSH later probed further:

"Your saying that my dentist knows [about the rumors] because of work you did? Wow, I must say, I'm impressed. I mean really, everyone knows -- how did that happen?"

[nicmarlo]

Matthew Mosk
David Snyder

Well, perhaps it's time that we did a little digging into these two, eh?

"considering how "closetted" homo reporters have been covering for their "out" political and religious buddies who get themselves into trouble, the angle might be worth investigating."

Good idea....can devote a thread to such a topic, as well. I'd be very interested in such, myself, either helping or being pinged. Some other friends of mine might also be interested in that, as well.

[Lazamataz]

This is what I have so far, as far as guidelines to help our prominent freepers avoid damage in the future:

If You Are A High-Profile Individual In “Real Life”….

If your daily job is such that you are a high-profile individual – as example, an official in a Republican campaign, or a state official in a Republican administration, or a rightward-leaning reporter – please read this article and take these suggestions.

1. Please don’t reveal your identity. Please don’t drop hints as to who you are. Please don’t succumb to the temptation to show off a little and thusly compromise your anonymity.
   
   
2. Know that there are Democrat operatives (and now, it appears, Legacy Media reporters) who pretend to be loyal conservatives. They will attempt to get you to reveal damaging information about your candidate, your administration, or your media enterprise.
   
   
3. This is for ALL Freepers: Never reveal any personal contact information. Please don’t post (or share in Freepmail) any email accounts, private phone numbers, addresses, or places of employment – unless you really know and trust the person to whom you are revealing these things.
   
   
4. Know that Freepmail can be, and sometimes is, exposed publicly. Please, never say anything in Freepmail that you would not want posted on the public forum.

Please, people, add whatever you think might be helpful, and I will post the result as a new article.

[Lazamataz]

Just a thought, but has anyone tipped Drudge off to this?

No, could I task you with this? I have a few irons in the fire already. Summarize what has occured, and point Matt to this thread.

[First_Salute]

In case you missed this.

[beyond the sea]

pressies being here and posing as mere "peasants with pitchforks" -- I'm surprised they didn't say peasants in pj's.

And so, if tit for tat, is the word of the day, then why not let FREEP have access to newsies' editorial rooms? How about access to your inner "chat boards" and "emails"? -- –LOL.

But this issue of "what is a reporter" is a good one which needs discussion. -—yep, this needs to be redefined.

****

I watch all the nightly political shows, so I get sources sometimes confused. But last night one of the lefties on one of the shows was bemoaning the report that the veteran reporter, Sarah McClendon, before her death, had been banned for three months from W.H. briefings for asking the wrong question. Oh well.

;-)

[clyde260]

Different words, same idea I just had. But I think we need more exposure than Drudge. Sean or Rush should be interested in this.

I'm just thinking that a journalist goes underground, garners a false sense of trust, uses unethical tactics, plants the seeds of deceit, creates news, gets a person fired, and walks away with the reward: A Paycheck and a smile. YUCK!

Fair and Balanced MY ARSE!

[nicmarlo]

great start, laz

[Mo1]

By the way MD4Bush, I happen to know that you were using dial-up. Does your mind reel trying to figure out what else is known about you?

*L* .. that should get him thinking :0)

[Alia]

but we need to extract conclusions from them, and decide on course of action

You didn't miss my big point at all, Laz. And, this matter does need discussion.

[conservative in nyc]

I'm just thinking that a journalist goes underground, garners a false sense of trust, uses unethical tactics, plants the seeds of deceit, creates news, gets a person fired, and walks away with the reward: A Paycheck and a smile. YUCK!

Have any proof that this is what actually occurred? I sure don't.

I think we need to be very careful before accusing the WaPo of doing anything more than sloppy reporting on NCPAC's initial post and reprinting FReepmails that were meant to be private. We don't know how they got their hands on the FReepmails or who MD4BUSH really is.

[Lazamataz]

You didn't miss my big point at all, Laz. And, this matter does need discussion.

Please see my #462 and add to it if you can.

[Mo1]

Web sights like FreeRepublic and Power line need to stick together because the other side has their game plan going on now,and are planing their tactics.

I have no doubt we'll all stick together :0)

[Alia]

Thank you, Arasina. I didn't know that.

Junie Hausenfraus and Bart Doolittle'

Hmm.. must be a focus group thing in marketing. I find both those names to be very endearing.

[Lazamataz]

We don't know how they got their hands on the FReepmails

We can surmise with pretty good probability of being right.

or who MD4BUSH really is.

Obviously, to me, it is either a Dem operative or a WaPo 'reporter'.

[JesseJane]

Alia, first thanks for the ping to this thread!! I missed it entirely.

Another excellent dismantling of what appears to be developing as Old Media / New Media war, and diagraming the layers of the battlefield. You know this is a war, because the poison pen people have called big daddy government to make it stop!!

---

In the early Dan Blather days, it seemed to merely be at odds with each other, but now, it's a war. Another part of this viciousness, I believe, lies in snobbery and elitism. Hand in hand with 'how dare you' is 'we know what's good for you', because of course, we are smarter and better than you'. The *fact* that they become unwrapped when some of us peons have minds of our own, and dont care for their smarmy rude tone with the President, is enough for us to fully embrace a new reporter that shoves it back in their face, and asks an EXCELLENT question. In a funny way it reminds me of how adults get blown away by observant questions little kids ask; the adult first laughs and then is amazed that at the acuteness of the question.

I'm not comparing this medium with children, but rather its impact on those who 'were' in charge of asking the questions. So what has also resulted is Shock and Denial, Anger and Retribution, which will eventually defeat them. They see no place at the table for a message they can not control, and isn't that JUST LIKE the Democrat party today, and who is NOT welcome in their tent.

The President took *one* question from Gannon. Was it covered with a bit of partisan sniping, yes... the *other side* does it within the question, while Gannon prefaced his question with it. 'Mr. President, how are you going to be able to reach out to ...?' You know what, I wanted to know the answer to that too. Since MSM can not and will not pose a question that is on most of our minds, someone has to. And the President basically gave us the answer.. he'll keep trying but go straight to the people when he must. And that's exactly what he's doing.

Gannon did this. Helped get a message from the President to us all. If the press won't tell it to you straight, then I'll come to you. Good job Gannon.

I think we should request the WH make more room in the pressers for other voices. Balance things out.

[Mad Dawgg]

"Ted Kennedys handle is 66oldsmobile ..."

Really, I always suspected his handle was LastDanceForMaryJo...

[Lazamataz]

Thanks, and ping anyone else you think might be useful in this endeavor. I might post it as a working thread.

[MeekOneGOP]

..... How many times has FR broke major news stories?
I can't even keep track anymore.

We are what the Red states turn to for info. .....

[Mo1]

Who is Michael Olesker? Did he just slip up here -- BIG TIME? Or is he just wrong about MD4BUSH's identity?

Could be that or he could have heard a rumor

[AFPhys]

It's the last gasp of a dying empire. They know their days are numbered, so their only hope is to pull the whole house of cards down with them as they go. But it won't work. For every MSM reporter being paid to generate news, there are 1000 Buckheads and TankerKC's able to discern fact from fiction without MSM help, and they contribute to sites like this for free. And the fact that this site exists through voluntary contributions alone, means it will not be influenced by the same influences that buy off the old media. As long as FreeRepublic remains true to its charter, it will continue to be funded by average folks looking for real information. And the dollars that used to roll into newspaper and news magazine offices will continue to dry up until the old media no longer exists.

Well worth repeating. Thanks John and Jim...