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?"

[HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity]

..... How many times has FR broke major news stories?

FREEREPUBLIC.com - Staying up late to get to the truth.

[Liberty Valance]

Mark Steyn coming up on Laura Ingraham's radio program....shortly. I've read his columns...never heard him live.

[vox_freedom]

Google search: site:freerepublic.com "Your saying that my dentist knows"

Probably means that the dentist implanted the radio chip in the wisdom tooth.
Just remember that you can't be clinically proven as paranoid if they really are after you.

[Antoninus]

Uh, oh. If MD4 first put this up at 11:05, yet the WaPo story occurred no later than 11:34 on 2/8, there is no way that WaPo could have gotten their information from the public MD4 post. How could they have written the story, edited it, and published on their web site in 29 minutes? They didn't! WaPo had the NCPAC e-mails prior to public posting by MD4. The public posting was just a cover. So, either MD4 is a WaPo insider, or someone there hacked NCPAC's private e-mail.

Any lawyers out there who can comment on this??

[AFPhys]

I'm amazed I was able to find it so quickly, but here it is...

---

To: Timeout

I stated (at length in discussions) on a thread a couple days ago that this is now not only a battle between the SwiftVets and the peaceniks of the 60s, but that this campaign has become a battle - a great battle - between the Old Media Fraudcasters and other mediots, and the New Media - with talk radio/ internet/ blogs.

This has become a battle to the death. Only one will be left standing. The 'Nam Vets (including me and many of my fellows in arms) are not going to be able to be silenced by the President or by the Demodogs or by the Fraudcasters. We know the truth. There is a great well of support we can draw on, and righteous anger about the way we have been treated. Many others are just as angry about how they have been misled by the Fraudcasters and the NYSlimes, et al, and they are now seeing a way to "get a bit of their own back."

The Old Media and the Fraudcasters have gotten away with lying for so long now, and the critical mass of people has been reached who understand it and now are fed up with that. Don't be surprised if some of those outlets are no longer "news" outlets four years from now.

It is a monumental struggle now. Many realize it, too. It will result in monumental changes in the way the bulk of people get their news.
/

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1204754/posts?page=3683#3683
3,683 posted on 09/02/2004 1:08:14 AM EDT by AFPhys ((.Praying for President Bush, our troops, their families, and all my American neighbors..))

[Freedom2specul8]

Great question...


ping to read later....

[BillF]

This place really never gets dull.:-)

"May you leave in interesting times," is an ancient Chinese curse. :)

[AFPhys]

This is a good idea, Laz.

It might be a good to have a couple paragraphs with a teaser linked to the main FR page, also.

[Danae]

Why is it that when ever the MSM mentions us, they call us Bloggers? This isn't a Blog. Some of us might have Blogs, or surf the Blogs of others, but this STILL doesn't make us "Bloggers".

Hey! Ignorant Main Stream Media! TRY for accuracy in your reporting! Try a little bit!!! At least do enough research into the meaning of the word Blog before you use it!

[Antoninus]

Correct, that's why I used the phrase "no later than". You are also right in saying that the WaPo web story must have been posted on their web site even before 11:34, and possibly before 11:05. This certainly confirms that WaPo could not have used the public posting by MD4.

If that's the case, then clearly the later public posting by MD4Bush was an exercise in CYA and perhaps a strong bit of circumstantial evidence that the WaPo is more deeply involved in this than simply as the recipients of the information in question.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Looks like the Wa(com)Post is MD4BUSH.

That is a serious breach of journalist ethics , ( if they have any ), it seems to me. Using a "Sting Operation" to make some news.......

[Howlin]

Geez, looks like I went to bed too early last night; what a thread!

[Lazamataz]

It might be a good to have a couple paragraphs with a teaser linked to the main FR page, also.

I think so.

[advance_copy]

I've confirmed via Yahoo news that the WaPo article was published at precisely 11:05pm ET. That the WaPo article was posted at the same time as MD4's unethical revealing NCPAC's private messages confirms exactly what you are saying. The MD4 post on 2/8 was nothing other than a CYA move, attempting to provide cover for the WaPo. This provides further indication that WaPo was working in cahoots with (or actually is) MD4 to smear NCPAC and Gov. Ehrlich.

[conservative in nyc]

Advance_copy was able to find out that the WaPo story was posted on Yahoo! News at 8:05PM. We think that's Eastern. But even if it's Pacific, the WaPo story was posted pretty much at the same time as the MD4BUSH dump here.

[doug from upland]

Journalist ethics? The Wash Post? It is all agenda journalism.

[VisualizeSmallerGovernment]

N ancy Pelosi
O sama Bin Laden
R obert Byrd
M ichael Moore
S addam Hussein
R obert Redford
E van Bayh
V ladimir Putin
E van Thomas
N ew York Times
G ene Gene The Dancing Machine
E dward Kennedy

[maggief]

FYI:

http://www.thetentacle.com/letters/letter36.html

Lee Marshall Challenged To Reveal Himself

August 14, 2002

As someone who is concerned about the ethics of an opinion columnist hiding behind the pseudonym "Lee Marshall" and Mr. Asbury permitting this on his web site, I posed the following question to Howard Kurtz, the media analyst for the Washington Post, in his online discussion of Monday, August 12. Below is the question I posed and his response.

Frederick, Md.: Howard, this is question about local Frederick County media and I hope you find it applicable to your chat. In Frederick we have a Web site for local political commentary and news called thetentacle.com. David Snyder wrote an article about the site and it's owner in the July 14 Post. David refers to it as "sort of home-brewed local Drudge Report -- from a motley assortment of amateur columnists."

One of the columnists uses the pseudonym "Lee Marshall." He refuses to identify himself and the site owner John Asbury will not reveal his identity.

In the area of political commentary and opinion what is the ethics of this? Would The Post ever knowingly publish political commentary under a pseudonym? Thanks.

Howard Kurtz: Not as a regular feature. It would be one thing to publish a piece by someone inside the bureaucracy who would be in danger of losing his or her job if identified. And e-mailers are not always fully identified. But I don't think any news outfit or Web site should regularly give a platform to someone who shields his or her identity. There's something odd about that.

Mr. "Marshall" should reveal his identity or at the very least explain why he can not or will not do so. Mr. Asbury should not give Mr. Marshall a platform until he does provide an explanation. Or is Mr. Marshall just a coward?

---

From the WP Archives:

Buy Complete Document
Political Web Site Entangles a Town; Walkersville Man's Cyber- Salvos, Commentary Target City, County Government; [FINAL Edition]
David Snyder. The Washington Post. Washington, D.C.: Jul 14, 2002. pg. C.04

Section: METRO
ISSN/ISBN: 01908286
Text Word Count 943
Document URL:

Abstract (Document Summary)

From his cluttered Walkersville basement, Ashbury has for seven months tossed these rhetorical (and clearly satirical) cyber-bombs into the halls of the county's political establishment. His platform, a Web site called the Tentacle (www.thetentacle.com), is a smorgasbord of political commentary and news -- a sort of home- brewed, local Drudge Report -- from a motley assortment of amateur columnists. It has no advertisements, no revenue ...

Buy Complete Document

[Matchett-PI]

"Ted Kennedys handle is 66oldsmobile ..."

He hasn't seen his handle in ages.

[Cold Heat]

Any lawyers out there who can comment on this??

When I got the board in the wee hours this morning, It was my understanding that we are working on it.

That is why Jim put the thread in question back up.

He said it was developing!

They are all over it.