The JournoList Saga Continues

Pages: 1 2

News of the existence of “JournoList,” a 400-member listserv e-mail chain of liberal Washington D.C. journalists, began to emerge last year.  It hit a peak several weeks ago when Dave Weigel, who was covering conservative politics for the Washington Post, was fired. Weigel’s expletive-laced frothings, aimed at some of his sources and subjects, were released to Tucker Carlson’s political website, the Daily Caller.

The list had always been highly discussed in conservative circles, but its founder, Ezra Klein, did his best to dismiss speculation that it was anything but innocuous. Weigel’s e-mails revealed otherwise. Andrew Breitbart later offered $100,000 for a member to come forward with the entire JournoList archive.

Through a source, Carlson came through with the archive last week. Weigel and his list-mates concluded that their now-revealed rants should be held private, even if shared with the inboxes of 400 other people.

Imagine, in one instance, if a state official were disclosing stories about state and security secrets at a party of 400 people. Most of those details would be online before said state official was home for the evening. But using Klein’s logic, and that of his like-minded cadre, all such matters should be off the record due to privacy. That’s an important fact to keep in mind, because most Washington D.C. journalists, at least of the so-called mainstream, liberal, and objective varieties, had little qualms with the New York Times when it made decision after decision to reveal state secrets involving American intelligence, or when phone calls between John Boehner and Newt Gingrich were surreptitiously recorded and transcribed by a media outlet. Washington journalists would have you believe their own rants to an audience of several hundred are of more importance than national security matters or personal phone calls.

That’s a small kernel of the hypocrisy revealed by Carlson and the Daily Caller. For years, conservative complaints of teamwork among supposedly objective journalists and liberal politicos was said to be muckraking; that these journalists weren’t, in fact, treating politics as a team sport, but were operating objectively. The list’s existence in itself shows that isn’t the case. Several mainstream outlets are well represented among the list members, such as TIME magazine, Politico, the Baltimore Sun, and the Washington Post, as well as those from opinion outlets such as The New Republic, Salon, and The Nation. Conspicuous by absence are members of conservative outlets.

Inclusion of conservative members would have been detrimental to the list’s purpose. Members of JournoList corroborated in shaping the narrative on political stories in a manner benefiting the progressive movement. This ranged from outrage over the questioning of Barack Obama by ABC News during a presidential debate, to a discussion on how to handle Sarah Palin’s nomination.

The outrage over the ABC News debate prompted a letter to the network, signed by 45 members of the list, who were upset over the questioning of then-candidate Obama about his connection and relationship with Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who had repeatedly made racial and other incendiary remarks from the pulpit.

Pages: 1 2

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Lfox328 Lfox328

    I know that this story is accurate, but I cannot help but ask, how could it be true? These are the same people that think revealing state secrets and military secrets is just hunky-dory.

    These folks are the "best and the brightest" that journalism's got?

    Please.

  • Guest

    The most telling point in all of this is how closely it maps to the actual coverage given the stories discussed on the "List." Ridicule Sara Palin as a method of attacking her credability? Check. Ignore racist rants of canidate Obama's pastor? Check.
    The membership of the"List" really isn't that important. What is important is how strongly the plans and designs for coverage maps to what the "Mainstream" media coverage actually turned out to be. At this point, I no longer believe there is any viability left to the "Mainstream.' That is truly distressing.

  • Cuban Refugee

    It is high time for American truth seekers to run away as fast as they can from the NY Times, the Washington Post, TIME, Newsweek, Politico, the Huffington Post, and the rest of the purveyors of statism. Although this sinister cabal has been a well-known secret for many years, now that its nefarious complicity is out in the open it has been shown to be as revolting as a horror movie, and as evil as if the 400 were legions of Lucifer. The damage they have caused our nation is incalculable, and their duplicitous legacy will remain long after they are gone like a trail of slime from repulstive slugs.

  • Spider

    Cuban Ref — well put I couldn't have said it better. I just hope people wake up to this before it is too late.

  • ajnn

    and how will the 'average american' learn that the mainstream media is a corrupt tool of the left ?

    I don't know. do you ?

  • 11Hotel

    The only reason this is not a bigger story is because the MSM will make sure it is not; THAT is a problem.
    How can a republic survive if the alleged free press is championing the side of the commies/progressives/liberals.
    When you really think about it it is GD scary stuff. We will see how bad it gets.
    I would just like to see a guest on This Week to call out the creatures on national TV.

  • DrBukk

    I had thought the treason off Dan Rather would wake up the people, but no. Attempting to influence the outcome of a presidential election by fraud? Move along, nothing to see here.

  • voted against carter

    And the Progresssive Leftwingnut Libratard dumbocrat's wonder WHY NO ONE WATCHES OR READS THIER PAPERS, MAGAZINES, NEWS SHOWS. Dhuuu, OHHHH!!!!!

  • http://netzero.com Steve Chavez

    I have a friend who only has the basic channels since cable is unavailable in his mountain area cabin. He only has ABC, NBC, CBS, AND PBS as his news and he is so liberal it's ridiculous. When I ask him about certain stories, he doesn't know anything about them.

    He heard of a poll taken where "40 % of America are liberals and only 20% were conservative." I proved to him that he had it backwards. Just last week I asked him about the Journolist story and he didn't know anything. He came over the next day and I googled it to prove it.

    I then said "What you don't know, won't hurt you and if the MSM didn't report it, it didn't happen." If it did happen they ask where you got that information and if you say Fox, they'll call that slanted even if Fox uses their own speeches, links, and writings.

    You want slanted media? Check out the newspaper at your local newspaper.

  • rob

    This is why piles of human feces like Ackerman need to be made to prove their charges in a court of law. It's time to start sueing these leftwing race-baiters.