« 3/23: A Nice Blogouillabaisse, Served With Blogoulash And A Side of Blogumbo | Main | 3/27: Ex Post Facto »

March 24, 2006

3/24: Roads? Where We're Going, We Don't Need Roads

The one-year anniversary of the Blogometer will arrive next Thursday, March 30, but I -- William Beutler, the guy who's hidden behind that annoying "editorial 'we'" for all this time -- won't be here to mark the occasion. Today is my last day compiling the Blogometer; I recently accepted a position with a different company doing something else blog-related -- and the catch is, they won't let me do that unless I give this up. It's a tough call, but an inevitable one -- this is a heck of a beat, but a hell of a grind.

Thanks go to Hotline editor Chuck Todd, who gave me the chance to create this thing last February, and then in June consented to publish it on the web for free. Definitely a big step -- you can have a Hotline subscription for a song... and by that I mean buying the rights to "Hey Jude." Thanks to my backup/assistant Blogometerers Mike Memoli, and now Reid Wilson. Thanks also to my tipsters; don't forget to tip my successors as well -- just direct them to the address above right. And thanks to the bloggers I've gotten to know or gotten to know better. I hope I've done a truthful job of tracking and telling of your travails, and I plan to keep watching this community develop -- brilliant and infuriating and everything else it may be. As a writer, I have to look at the blogosphere as a unique group -- or collection of groups -- on a new literary scene with a new literary scheme: It's certainly not the most eloquent, but it is perhaps the most honest and -- for communicating ideas -- certainly the most effective.

I won't be here anymore, but I won't be far; I'll be around in other endeavors. The decision to leave doesn't come lightly, but as Homer Simpson once said: Meh. I've had a good run. So let's do this one last time:


°    °   °   °   °

Today is nearly one big edition of our recurring category subhead "Blogs vs. the MSM." The controversy surrounding GOP activist/Post.com blogger Ben Domenech has gone from major blogswarm to critical mass since early last p.m., and we could have written this entire edition about him. But we also touch on comparatively minor controversies involving the New York Times and ABC News. Both cases are all about, or ultimately about, media bias to the bloggers concerned (and they are concerned). The right is reacting to reports that to them confirm MSM bias against Pres. Bush at the NYT and ABC. The left continues investigating Domenech and putting pressure on the Post; to their mind his hiring is an example of the MSM diminishing itself to quiet conservative critics. The Domenech debacle is in fact alarming to both sides, as both fear the negative attention it's getting will dissuade other media companies from making hires out of the blogosphere.

We also touch on recent days' events in Iraq and Afghanistan, and don't miss our coda proposing a grand unified theory of the political-media establishment. Plus, Hotline's poll editor takes a look at the latest Hotline/Diageo poll, which asked 600 GOPers to name their favorite blogs. The responses were very, very perplexing. Very. Try as we might, an adequate explanation of the results escape us. If you have a theory, well, as we said -- the e-mail address can be found in the sidebar just to the northeast of this entreaty.

DOMENECH I: Under Attack By Commie Nazis!

Update: Shortly after deadline, Domenech resigned from the Washington Post.

The saga of Ben Domenech, the Washington Post and their left-wing critics continues apace. What was a big story the morning his blog Red America launched quickly became fodder for politicians and the MSM. Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA) sent a letter to the Post in the p.m. on 3/22, as noted at Eschaton and dismissed at RedState. E&P has been on the case. Header: "New 'Wash Post' Blogger: OK, Coretta King Was Not a Communist, My Bad." The Post's Howard Kurtz covered it as well this a.m.

The controversy has already been inspiration for discussion as well, where at Real Clear Politics, Dave Mastio points out that MSM reporters often come from liberal magazines such as The New Republic, Washington Monthly, and American Prospect. He counts current NYTer Nicholas Confessore, Posties Katherine Boo and David Segal, and others. Then he shifts gears: "Can anyone name for me a current New York Times or Washington Post reporter who was previously on the staff of National Review, The Weekly Standard or The American Spectator? No? Maybe that's because there are none. And over time, this imbalance has consequences for the press."

The development that really sent it this into overdrive was the discovery that Domenech had posted at RedState as "Augustine." The left is on a mission, and so far they've been firing on all cylinders -- although the level of vitriol directed at Domenech could have undercut their claims about Domenech/Augustine's intemperate rhetoric, for which he apologized at his Post blog yesterday.

For using the descriptor "Communist" to describe Coretta Scott King, Media Matters' David Brock sent a letter to the entire Post management calling on them to fire this "bigoted blogger." OR-based film producer Jane Hamsher wrote a much harsher letter to Post.com's Jim Brady -- her 2nd this week -- calling on him to admit that Domenech is the author who writes as "Augustine." That can be found at her own Firedoglake as well as at Huffington Post.

Full disclosure: She also mentions us (although her insinuation that the Blogometer itself is a conservative publication is incorrect). As it happens, the Blogometer had an unwitting role in exposing Domenech's name. We've known for some time that Domenech was Augustine, and thought nothing of it when we described him as "Ben 'Augustine' Domenech" in our 1/26 edition. Not long after a diarist at Daily Kos noticed that he couldn't figure out where Domenech's RedState posts were, someone turned up the connection at Google. Here at the Blogometer we never like being part of a story -- but sometimes it's unavoidable. The meta can become the subject, especially in the blogosphere.

In RedState's Corner-esque RedHot, pseudynomous contributor Blanton -- himself recently accused of racism by MyDD's Matt Stoller -- called the appellation absurd: "The same people who have cheapened usage of the word 'nazi' will do the same for the word 'racist' and we will all be worse off because of it. In the meantime, people will start ignoring them because they seem too comfortable screaming racism every chance they get." Meanwhile, Augustine himself posted about the Cowboys picking up kicker Mike Vanderjagt.

DOMENECH II: Gimme A Lift?

All that became moot when the scrutiny applied to Domenech's past writings turned up something that had nothing to do with invective: a history of plagiarism. So far, lefty bloggers have turned up multiple instances stretching from '99 (when Domenech was about 17) to '01. The Kurtz story above mentions it, but apparently was put to bed before the extent of it became clear. Lefty bloggers had already made a project of finding the most damning passages of Domenech's past writings, but now they're zeroing in on this "damned" thing.

Here's an as-complete-as-we-can-manage list of alleged incidents:

As Daily Kos' Hunter described the shift: "We've moved on from Domenech's funeral-day assertion that Coretta Scott King was a communist, or his comparison of the Supreme Court to the Ku Klux Klan. Those are small things. Now it's getting bad." Hilzoy at Obsidian Wings expounds on the seriousness of plagiarism -- the "mortal sin" of the writing profession -- and says, "if these charges pan out" and the Post doesn't "fire him, they have no standards at all."

This a.m., The Flat Hat itself carries an editorial titled: "Poison of plagiarism."

All this breathes new life into Brendan Nyhan's suspicion that he fabricated a Tim Russert quote, which he'd originally written for Spinsanity in 6/02. Salon's Joe Conason covers this angle and the plagiarism, too. Nyhan himself asks at his personal blog: "Talk about a lack of due diligence by the Post. Will the newspaper investigate the plagiarism charges and the mysterious AP article? Or will they just fire Domenech and try to salvage what's left of their reputation?"

Unsurprisingly, the controversy has consumed the Domenech co-founded RedState this a.m. There, Erick Erickson writes under the header "We Must Defend": "It's true. Ben Domenech is Augustine. And I stand behind him 100%. He has said nothing filled with racism or hate, or bigotry. In fact, Ben has been a leader in keeping those he dubs the 'evilcons' off RedState." More: "Ben is accused of being a racist, gay, homophobe, an incestuous lover of his own mother, a partisan, evil, and now a plagiarist. ... Should these people succeed, how many bloggers from either side will ever again get so far? I would suspect none -- not when there are people closer to the media who would fit the bill. ... What media company would want to take the risk of a blogswarm?" Dem-leaning blogger Bob Brigham, sometimes of Swing State Project, shows up in the comments and agrees with this point, but that's about all. Hitting the same point, liberal Sadly, No! whips up a Photoshopped Washington Post cover featuring a photo of Domenech and the header "Plagiarism Threatens Credibility of 'Blogosphere'"

Erickson continues in the same post: "And now those opposed to Ben have googled prior writings that on the surface appear suspicious, but only because permissions obtained and judgments made offline were not reflected online by an outdated and out-of-business campus newspaper." From the conclusion: "Ben Domenech deserves our full advocacy and defense. He has done nothing wrong and does not deserve urban legends about his wrong doing solely because of the lies of those who are jealous of his success."

Scott Shields, MyDD: "RedState responds, foaming at the mouth. Apparently, we're either making up the plagiarism charge or we're misinformed about the fact that all of those writers actually gave Domenech permission to copy their work." Shields is "pretty sure" the claim "will be debunked by morning. Just a hunch."

Erickson was followed soon after by the anonymous RedStater Machiavel: "In 2006 in America, we see perfect replicas of Stalin's drones at work in response to about the only decent thing said about the Domenech affair on Daily Kos" -- a diary posted by a liberal friend of Domenech's titled "I Know Ben Domenech," saying: "tone of the comments I've seen here and around the blogosphere about Ben, by people who surely haven't met him is sad." The Kossacks vigorously object. Back to Machiavel: "Now is the time to close ranks, and not give in to the temptations of the circular firing squad. Chris Bowers tells us that Ben's hiring signifies the death of the right-blogosphere. To the contrary, the scurrilous attacks on Ben signal the demise and fall of the left-blogosphere as an authentic alternative voice. They are now shills for traditional media and no more. ... Michelle. Hugh. Rush. Glenn. This is the moment. Where will you stand?" Hewitt has said nothing so far, while Glenn -- that being Instapundit's Reynolds, hasn't either -- but does link to a story about plagiarism at Chinese universities. Of the ones named, by Machiavel, Michelle Malkin quotes Atrios commenters attacking home-schooling, and comes up with a new apothegm: "First, Bush Derangement Syndrome. Now: Ben Domenech Derangement Syndrome."

And all subsequent posts on the front page dealt with the issue: "We Must Continue" by Moe Lane, "Pathetic" by Clayton Wagar, "The midgets' fury, part 2: homeschooling" by Josh "Tacitus" Trevino, and "This is About Decency" again by Machiavel.

Otherwise, the right has pretty much stayed mum about it. But those who do are split between their objection to the invective leveled at Domenech and what appear to be the plain facts.

WV-based journo Don Surber was ready to throw him overboard even before the plagiarism: "[T]his is the sort of 'blogger' that Jeff Jarvis and Glenn Reynolds want to replace actual journalists like me -- guys who have covered a fire and who have withstood attacks from the left ([Dem Sen.] Bob Byrd big enough for you?) and know you don't go running into the fray screaming 'Bring it on!' at the top of your lungs. They will and how." More: "Blog revolution? Marketplace politics? Sure, this guy got the blog gig the old fashioned way: He had connections. Daddy. Republicans. Regenery press."

He certainly does -- or did -- have other defenders, though. Dan Riehl defended him against Media Matters -- but when the charges of plagiarism arose, declined to continue. Likewise, Confederate Yankee expended a great deal of time rebutting Brock's letter forcefully -- but when he learned of the new charges via Riehl, stood down, calling it a "strong argument for Domenech to resign." Late this a.m., Malkin joined them: "And, painfully, Domenech's detractors, are right. He should own up to it and step down. Then, the Left should cease its sick gloating and leave him and his family alone."

At press time, there was nothing further from Domenech, but watch Red America -- as well as the sites linked above -- to see what comes next.

BLOGS VS. THE MSM I: Amusing Himself To Death

On 3/23 Drudge Report splashed the all-caps headline "ABC NEWS EXEC: 'BUSH MAKES ME SICK'; E-MAIL REVEALED" underneath the scan of a 9/30/04 -- during the 1st debate between Bush and John Kerry -- Berry'd e-mail from ABC prod. John Green (now with "GMA"), to a person or persons unknown: "Are you watching this? Bush makes me sick. If he uses the 'mixed messages' line one more time, I'm going to puke." Subsequent updates note an e-mailed apology from Green to ABC News staff, and a friend of Green saying: "John feels so badly about this email. He is a straight shooter and great producer who is always fair." Hugh Hewitt hosted Instapundit's Reynolds and Kausfiles' Mickey Kaus on his 3/24 show; Radioblogger has the transcript. Kaus, often friendly to conservative arguments, writes later: "I tried not to agree with everything Hugh said." USS Neverdock notes that "GMA" itself noted that a viewer survey showed "the vast majority believed the media were biased in their Iraq coverage." Considering the Green revelations: "That's not surprising." At IMAO, Laurence Simon has fun coming up with fantastical, just-shy-of-impossible alternate explanations for the meaning of Green's e-mail. On last p.m.'s "Countdown," host Keith Olbermann appeared to pin the leaked e-mail on the WH. While left-leaners are mostly occupied with Domenech or other issues, new Huffington Post hire (from Media Bistro) Rachel Sklar pushes back: "This just in: a voter had opinions about a presidential candidate. ... He provides no examples and no further evidence of how Green or any other ABC staffer prepare reports that were biased or presented conclusions that were unsupported by fact." She adds: "For the record, Bush made reference to 'mixed' messages and/or signals 8 times during the debate, and Kerry made 4 in response." Right-trending Dem Roger L. Simon agrees in part, but arrives at a different conclusion: "Frankly, Green should not be so upset. This is his opinion and he's welcome to it in a free society. The idea that he would be impartial is simply a myth. Last I heard John Green was a human being. Only machines (so far) are impartial. In fact, it's good viewers of ABC are informed of the opinions of those producing the network's shows. It gives those viewers much more ability to evaluate what they are seeing."

Those linking to the story include Blogs for Bush, Weapons of Mass Discussion, Conservative Outpost, The Aurora, Misguided Roses, Bile, Snark and Sneer, Andi's World, Expose The Left and just about every other conservative blog on the planet.

BLOGS VS. THE MSM II: St. Nicholas The Confessore

A week after the New York Times erred in identifying the wrong man as the hooded detainee in the infamous Abu Ghraib photo (see 3/15 Blogometer), as of 3/23, New York Times' Confessore is re-reporting a 3/8 story on a Brooklyn woman who claimed to be a Katrina victim, but was not. She now faces charges of fraud. E&P reports on the latest controversy. The right never misses an opportunity to hit the Times, but some liberal bloggers jump in, too:

Conservative Power Line's John Hinderaker: "Now the Times has fallen for another fraud. And, curiously enough, it ties in with another of the Times' favorite opportunities to bash the Bush administration -- Hurricane Katrina!" Decision '08's Mark Coffey makes the same point, and calls this "a rather good argument for extending diversity beyond accidents of birth like race and gender towards items of choice like, oh, say, political preferences..." And Mary Katherine Ham adds: "And, they let the same reporter who goofed on the original story write the follow-up. That seems like a bad practice. So much for any disciplining."

On the left, Derek Smalls/Montgomery Burns/Waylon Smithers/Ned Flanders/Kent Brockman/Rev. Lovejoy/Principal Skinner/Dr. Hibbert/Rainer Wolfcastle Harry Shearer writes in his Eat the Press column at HuffPo: "Howell Raines is starting to look good in the rear-view mirror. Bill Keller's NYTimes is turning page two into a regular Sorry We Didn't Check That Department. ... But what, in fact, is going on at the Times? A (pardon me) rational organization, in the wake of the Judy Miller debacle, might have wanted to ratchet up its fact-checking." Penraker snarks: "Please, rehire Jayson Blair, it can only improve the quality of the paper at this point."

AFGHANISTAN: The Afghan Wig-Out

After buzzing around the blogosphere for several days, we have to make mention of Abdul Rahman, the Afghan Muslim who converted to Christianity and now faces the death penalty. New York Times has today's updated story, in which the presiding judge promises to resist foreign pressure. This story's been a swarm for days. A sampling of today's commentary: Mahablog says Rahman's death would "likely stir up more anti-Islamic feeling in Europe and cause the Christian Right to re-evaluate our military adventures in the Middle East, which would be a disaster for the Bush Administration." Sec/State Condoleezza Rice "is pulling every string she can pull to set Rahman free." Below the Beltway also applauds Rice. Donklephant asks: "Aren't these Taliban tactics?" The Jawa Report thinks we still don't understand Islam well enough: "Our liberation of Afghanistan and our hopes for it must be tempered by the reality of Islam as more than just a religion as understood in the West -- it is a political ideology." John McIntyre at Real Clear Politics wants to know, "Is democracy compatible with Islamic law?" California Conservative asks: "Where is the outrage from the Left?" He raises a good point. The liberal blogosphere hasn't weighed in on these pieces nearly as much as the right. Captain Ed thinks even the Bush admin isn't doing enough.

IRAQ: CPT Ain't Down With The USA

Christian Peacekeeper Teams announced the release of two Canadians and a Briton and once again mourned the death of American Tom Fox. AP and Wall Street Journal's Taranto write it up. Mostly happy ending, right? Not in the least. CPT's first release didn't mention their rescue by U.S., British and Canadian soldiers, and that got conservative bloggers swarming. Gina Cobb notes with discontent the absence of gratitude towards the rescuing troops. Michelle Malkin does too, but notes with smugness the CPT's revised release late last p.m. expressing thanks to the troops. Here's her post before the updated release came out. Hyscience, Relapsed Catholic, Big Pharaoh, Outside the Beltway, The Belmont Club and Stop The ACLU pile on. Blogs for Bush's Mark Noonan compares the CPT and other "peacemakers," which he puts in quotations, to isolationists pre-WWII. Jawa Report keeps an updated list of all U.S. hostages in Iraq.

Jeanne at Body and Soul wants to know how a suspect gave information to U.S. interrogators in such a short time: "Does a frightening implication -- You guess how we got information out of a captive in well under three hours -- hang in the air after that claim?"

Other insights into the operation: Murdoc Online first posted a simple news report, then criticized the CPT's reaction, then became skeptical of MSM reports of the rescue, noting differences in coverage. The Green Knight notes with interest the involvement of the top-secret Joint Task Force 2, a Canadian military team "so secret that the Canadian government doesn't generally even acknowledge their existence."

Well, He Is A Dreamboat ...

Special to the Blogometer [Update: Er, not quite. Also available at Hotline On Call], by Hotline poll editor Aoife McCarthy:

Raise your hand if you knew Anderson Cooper had a blog. Now raise your hand if that is your first stop for news on current events. Yeah -- didn't think so. But don't jump too quickly -- a couple of things need to be kept in mind when looking at this question. 

Which Political Blogs Do You Read Regularly?
(multi. accepted, top 4 listed)  -Bush Approve-  -Evang- 
                             All Strg Smwht Dis  Yes  No
360 Blog/Anderson Cooper     21%  28%  15%  19%  23%  16%
AMERICABlog                   3    1    4    3    2    4
blogsforfox.blogspot.com      3    1    5    3    3    2
Daily Kos                     3    2    5    -    2    4

First of all this was only asked among those who said they read blogs (every day, few times a week, few times a month, or less often than that). The total of this sample is 197, placing the MoE above 6%. Of that 197, a plurality (74) could not name a specific blog or refused. Now that brings our total of blog-naming respondents down to 123 or 62% of all blog reader. This is just 20.5% of our original sample (think small).

The question was open-ended, and all responses were recorded verbatim. An exhaustive list of pre-coded options was given to interviewers that ran the full spectrum of ideology/partisanship. After the survey was completed, any pre-codes from the list that did not receive responses were deleted.

So how did Anderson Cooper come out on top? There are countless reasons this could have occurred, the most likely being name ID. First of all, CNN promotes their blogs -- a lot. Many of the blogs on the list were TV based. This could be a blog that they had heard of before, and subsequently were able to name. Keep in mind that respondents had to offer up responses for this question -- they were not offered a list to choose from. If they were, the results would vary drastically from what we see here. This is not the equivalent of asking "which newspaper do you read." That is a daily occurrence and an institution that readers grew up with, making them far less likely to forget a name or offer a skewed response. Blogs are a new medium, particularly among people outside the Beltway (i.e. our universe). This is a game of memory to offer a response that is appropriate.

To obtain complete poll results, go to www.diageohotlinepoll.com.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Notes Toward A Grand Unified Theory Of The Political-Media Complex

For some time we -- all right, let's ditch that "we" stuff -- I have entertained something of a grand unified theory to describe the current political-media landscape as well as explain institutional motivations and account for the political bias ascribed to them. This may strike one as obvious, or maybe too simplistic, but we do think it's a useful way to look at it. Here's a pared down version:

Within the Beltway and those outside who engage it, I count 3 discrete categories that can describe almost any media or influence-based organization. Let's take 3 examples among think tanks, one from each category: Brookings, AEI, and the Center for American Progress. Here are 3 more, from mixed media formats: Washington Post, Fox News, and Air America. Each fits into 1 of the 3 categories, respectively. We'll call these 3 categories the Inert Institutions, the Conservative Alternatives, and the Aggressive Progressives.

The Inert Institutions (IIs) -- Brookings and the Post -- comprise long-standing, major American establishments whose personnel and productions generally lean left, though they do not self-consciously think of themselves as such. They try to be fair, but fail often enough to be noticed, and targeted, by the... Conservative Alternatives (CAs), which is smaller and composed of groups younger than those in the 1st category. These groups are self-consciously conservative, if not always "movement." They are more popular in some ways (see: FNC's ratings) but not always respected across the spectrum. The Aggressive Progressives (APs) are a reaction to the CA's influence on the IIs -- part of the movement left, either quite recently founded or newly reinvigorated. More often than not, they self-describe as "progressive" instead of "liberal," and like the CAs, they are often viewed skeptically. Nor have they as large an audience yet as the CAs -- in large part because their natural audience is largely satisfied by the IIs. (Compare, in the same order: NPR, Rush Limbaugh and Pacifica.)

Where do bloggers fit? They're in all 3 categories, of course. Bloggers aligned with the CAs came to prominence in the aftermath of 9/11 (Instapundit), bloggers in the AP group sprang up during the WH'04 pre-primary season (Daily Kos), and only in the past year have the IIs gotten into the game (see: just about every single newspaper). Pressure groups and think tanks have been a bit slower, but they're getting in, too.

I actually think this is a rather even playing field -- though the GOP's current dominance may undercut this take -- even as it's balanced all wacky like a child's mobile. And just because it's evolved to this point doesn't mean it cannot evolve further. The APs category could become just as large as the CAs group. The IIs have been seeing its influence diminish. The safe bet is that those trends will continue, but you can never be sure.

Agree? Disagree? Agree to disagree? Drop me a line.

LEST WE FORGET: The Big Crunch

Like potato chips, we couldn't have just one:

  • Church sign generators are nothing new to the Internets, but Wuzza Dem makes it all seem new again.
  • At Words For My Enjoyment, Paul Davidson mourns the passing of the piggy-back ride.
  • Noting that Sen. Mike DeWine (R-OH) is proposing legislation prohibiting publication of stories about the NSA wiretap program, Fafblog! says DeWine doesn't go far enough: "It's one thing to ban journalists from talking about the NSA program, but what's truly needed is a law to prevent the public from thinking about it. ... The occupation of America's frontal lobes by the United States military may be long and costly, but the cause of freedom requires many a sacrifice."
  • And you already know whether you love Greg Gutfeld or whether you hate him.
  • Guess it's a good thing this is our final Blogometer -- apparently we humans are already marked for extinction.

NOTES AND ERRATA: Going Once... Going Twice...

Job Opening: The Hotline is seeking a staff writer to take over The Blogometer. Applicants must consider themselves regular consumers of political blogs (min. 2 years reading them, also must be a fan of blogs), be familiar with nationally read blogs from across the spectrum; know how to use blog search engines/aggregators (such as Technorati and Memeorandum); be able to quickly analyze and synthesize developments in the news as well as summarize ongoing blog activity with brevity, clarity and accuracy. Excellent writing and time-management skills are also a must. As with every Hotline position, we don't expect our writers to not have an opinion, we just expect them to keep it out of their work. Interested applicants should send their resumes to jvu@theatlantic.com.

Posted by at March 24, 2006 01:02 PM


Copyright 2007 by National Journal Group Inc.
The Watergate · 600 New Hampshire Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20037
202-739-8400 · fax 202-833-8069
NationalJournal.com is an Atlantic Media publication.