March 27, 2006

3/27: Ex Post Facto

So what is there to be learned from the Ben Domenech saga? For one, that you can't please all sides at the same time. WPNI was sensitive to complaints about the lack of a right-leaning view online, hired one, and then found itself inundated with complaints from those on the left who want an explicitly liberal view to counter it. In the process, plagiarism allegations surfaced, which leads to another lesson: Look before you jump. The MSM is trying to embrace online media for fear of being replaced entirely. We've seen some top bloggers picked, absorbed or heavily featured on MSM outlets, mostly with success. But as we see with Red America, "successful blogger" does not equal "successful journalist." The voices we feature in Blogometer are a mix of the expert who blogs part-time as an extra outlet, and the amateur whose blog is his/her only way of being heard. Some of the latter, perhaps, become successful beyond their ability, and while it's unfair to say Domenech was 'amateur,' his case shows there's a lot of vetting that should be done before a blogger is plucked from obscurity -- whether they're ready for prime time.

Clearly, the Domenech case was a focus this weekend, and reaction today is broken down in several categories. But as always, there's more to talk about, including the latest Scalia controversy, an update on the Abdul Rahman case, and talk on this weekend's immigration protests across the country.

DOMENECH I: (Less Than) A Week Performance

Just after 1 p.m. 3/24, WashingtonPost.com exec. ed. Jim Bradyannounced : "Domenech has resigned, effective immediately." He adds that the site was "not aware of any allegations that he had plagiarized any of his past writings. ... We appreciate the speed and thoroughness with which our readers and media outlets surfaced these allegations. Despite the turn this has taken, we believe this event, among other things, testifies to the positive and powerful role that the Internet can play in the the practice of journalism."

A sample of the comments: "Here's an idea for your next 'red america' hire: have someone google his clip file. And if you ever get around to hiring a 'blue america' blogger, you could do the same." "If you insist on having an additional right-wing voice on this site, here's hoping that you try to find someone with just a smidgen of integrity." "Mr. Brady's communication above is absolutely astounding. It reaches a height of irresponsibility that, in my opinion, disqualifies him from his position." "I think it's a powerful statement on the state of media in general that a journalistic institution with a repute for investigative reporting does not have the resources to do a simple background check on a new employee." There are many, many, many more.

Meanwhile, at Red State, Ben "Augistine" Domenech gives his side of the story. "I know that charges of plagiarism are serious. While I am not a journalist, I have, myself, written more than one thing that has been plagiarized in the past. But these charges have also served to create an atmosphere where no matter what is said on my Red America blog, leftists will focus on things with my byline from when I was a teenager." Among his explanations for alleged plagiarism: "The most recent accusation, is that I stole a music review from Crosswalk and passed it off at National Review Online. In fact, I wrote both lists myself; I was one of Crosswalk's music review contributors at the time. ... Virtually every other alleged instance of plagiarism that I've seen comes from a single semester's worth of pieces that were printed under my name at my college paper, The Flat Hat, when I was 17. ... The truth is, a more responsible teenager would've nipped this sort of thing in the bud. A less sloppy writer would have made sure that material copied from other places never made it into a published piece, and never necessitated apologies or explanations that will do nothing to stop the critics. I was wrong not to do so." He concludes: "To my friends: thank you for your support. To my enemies: I take enormous solace in the fact that you spent this week bashing me, instead of America."

Later, he offered an apology. Red State's Krempasky: "A young man took something and called it his own. He owes apologies to those writers, his editors, and especially his friends who have rushed to his defense in the past 48 hours. It is an embarrassing offense -- and one rightly criticized. All of the leadership of RedState has struggled mightily over the past few days, and have tried at every step to take the right course of action. Now that the story is complete, we can move on."

DOMENECH II: This Is Why Bloggers Aren't Armed

A sample of some of the reaction, first right, then left. Protein Wisdom: "[T]hose on the left who have been braying all day over Ben's downfall have two choices, as I see it: they can continue to gloat and carry around his scalp as a trophy to their own viciousness ... -- showing themselves to be the very fetishists of schadenfreude I accused them of being; or they can now explain to us why they don't hold their own to the same ethical standards." Sister Toldjah: "While Domenech did the right thing by resigning, and the conservative blogosphere has done their part in rightly condemning what Domenech has done and praising his resignation, one thing that should not be lost on this is that the people who viciously went after Domenech did not do so in order for the Washington Post to have an 'honest conservative blogger' at the Red America blog. ... The ultimate goal in all this after in all this was not just Domenech's resignation or firing, but the removal of the Red America blog from the Washington Post's website altogether." Decision '08: "Let's have none of this half-hearted grudging acknowledgment -- we were right with RatherGate, and they were right here. Furthermore, they did us a service, believe it or not, by finding these examples of 'idea theft' and bringing them to light. We don't want the conservative viewpoint, in such a high-profile outlet, to be represented by a plagiarist." The Unalienable Right: "It looks like the Washington Post simply hired the wrong guy. They did the right thing securing his resignation, there's just no excuse for plagiarism." UNCoRRELATED: "I feel bad for him, but frankly I wasn't all that pleased with the Washington Post's move--one of the most subtle but damaging things that can happen to any movement is having someone else pick your standard-bearer."

Talk Left: "Those on the right who have tried to justify's Domenech's alleged plagiarism by calling it an act of youthful indiscretion or somehow justifiable because they mostly pertained to movie reviews, are way off base. High school journalism students have had plagiarism drummed into them. He was writing for a college newspaper and a national publication. Matt Stoller's take: "It doesn't matter if it's hiring Ben Domenech or listening as Bush tries to convince you of the link between 9/11 and Saddam or that Iraq is now named 'flowers and candy land', journalists should no longer listen to the right-wing. ... When you do, and when you treat the conservative movement as if they are a legitimate source of information, you end up with WMDs in Iraq, 9/11 linked to Saddam, or on a small scale, an unethical racist trashing the brand of the Washington Post and the career of Jim Brady." Atrios: "[I]f the Post had announced a 'Blue America' along with 'Red America' Ben's plagiarism likely would've never been discovered. The outrage was over the fact that once again conservatives succeeding in mau-mauing a mainstream media outlet into balancing reporters with conservatives." Oliver Willis: "This prompts larger questions about conservative 'journalism'. This is a guy who - Wrote for National Review - Edited books for Regnery (Hugh Hewitt, Michelle Malkin) - Was a speechwriter for a U.S. Senator .. And consistently got kicked up the conservative food chain. Yet the minute he got work in the supposedly liberal mainstream media, that was the first time anyone scrutinized his past work (and the Post was asleep at the wheel, too) and it turns out he was a serial plagiarist."

From the "we're becoming mainstream" file, Markos Moulitsas of DailyKos appeared on CNN's "Reliable Sources" 3/26 and spoke to host Howard Kurtz about Domenech. Crooks and Liars has video and a partial transcript.

DOMENECH III: Picking Up The Pieces

The Woodchuck says that Brady's post.Blog info "does not indicate whether the Washington Post has learned any lessons from this debacle. Will its editors be more careful in the future? Will management think twice before trying to prove its bona fides to the howling harpies of the right wing?" Captain's Quarters disagrees: "The left-wing blogosphere came out in full attack mode from the moment this project was announced, and Jim stuck by his decision to hire Domenech and gave him a fair opportunity to prove himself. When the hysteria gave way to real problems ... Brady took the proper action in starting an investigation. If Domenech resigned on his own, or if the Post pushed it, the correct result has been achieved." FishBowlDC: "Even though dust hasn't settled yet, it's never too early to ask an all important question: Who would make a good author for the Red America blog? ... Before the plagiarism revelations surfaced, the best arguments against Domenech addressed the fact that Domenech's political philosophy/tone/comments didn't rise to a level commensurate with (what ought to be) the Post's standards." MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy: "I hope they still plan to run a right-of-center blog, but you know that no matter who they hire, that person will be viciously attacked. Hopefully that person will be more well-known/more 'tested' by the public." At CBS' Public Eye, Vaughn Ververs writes: "Let's say another conservative is hired to take over for Domenech. Is the Web site obligated to launch a 'Blue State' blog? Most editorial pages contain a mixture of voices, some conservative, some liberal some sort of moderate. But is there any obligation to operate under some formula? They may alienate a large segment of their audience, but they are free to print whatever voices they choose." Riehl World View offers this suggestion: "Create a predetermined number of slots -- 3, 6, 8, or whatever -- and audition and screen a small team of conservative bloggers to blog for washingtonpost.com, or a washingtonpost.comRight? The model would also work for the Left, should the site decide to do both." TAPPED: "I believe this episode with Domenech clearly shows why members of the press, for their own good, need to understand, support, and strengthen the distinction between journalism and online partisan activism."

IMMIGRATION: Get On The Bus

Following rallies this weekend in L.A., where 500K people came out, as well as Denver, Phoenix, Atlanta, Reno and other cities over immigration bills pending in the Senate and House, the blogosphere is talking about a major '06 and '08 issue. Los Angeles Times and the AP report on the story. Slate's Mickey Kaus writes a wrapup of the L.A. march and an overview of immigration as it will effect the '06 midterms. Instapundit's Glenn Reynolds thinks the rallies hurt immigration proponents' cause: "Illegal immigrants as individuals just trying to make a better life are sympathetic. Illegal immigrants as a mass movement making demands on the polity are considerably less so." Leon Wolf of RedState opines on the matter under the header "In Case You Thought This Was Going Away." The Corner's Mark Krikorian agrees, but sees the positive on the world stage: "The shape of immigrant protest in Europe is a sign of how much more intracable their immigration problem is than ours, and for that we should be grateful." Believing that most who participated in the rallies are illegal immigrants themselves, righty JunkYardBlog is shocked: "The mind reels at the arrogance of these scofflaws." PA Pundits, Power Line, Blogs For Bush, American Digest and Bill Bradley at New West Notes agree. Conservative Don Suber has a different, more immigrant-friendly approach: "They yearn to breathe free? Come on in. The 11 million illegal aliens in the nation pose little threat to national security. The 19 hijackers on Sept. 11 all were here legally. None were Mexican." Marc Cooper agrees, reporting that the L.A. protest was the largest in the city's history: "It seems to me that when an entire population -- who, after all, cleans our offices, cuts our lawns, serves our food, makes our beds, tends to our children and pays taxes but gets no refunds -- is threatened with criminalization they have the right and necessity to politically mobilize." Noting the blowback from Prop 187 in CA in '94, after which Latinos flocked to register as Dems, Pensito Review notes: "I hope the GOP follows through on its plan to "nationalize" the immigration issue this year. Let them reap the whirlwind." Huffington Post's Max Blumenthal has a report on "the largest, most energized demonstration I have ever witnessed in my life."

Newsweek profiles Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO), his drive to keep immigration bills alive, and his own '08 ambitions. Lefty Pam, at Pam's House Blend, on Tancredo's '08 hopes: "That's got to make Karl and Kenny Mehlman feel queasy." Slublog makes an historical analogy: "Tancredo is the second coming of Joseph McCarthy." Another Progressive Voice agrees: "This guy does not deserve to be a Representative of our government with the kind of hate he breathes." Andrew West, though, is on Tancredo's side.

In other immigration gossip around the blogosphere, Nathan Newman at TPM Cafe notes recent polls on the matter and comes to a conclusion: "Those who think humane approaches to immigration are "political suicide" are ignoring public opinion." ReasonOnline's Hit & Run notes the WH '08 implications of pending legislation, and notes that Pres. Bush speaks on immigration this a.m. at DAR Constitution Hall in DC. Michelle Malkin focuses on Bush's weekend radio address, which dealt with immigration, and dispells a popular myth: "We are not a 'nation of immigrants.'" And anti-immigration advocates are noting that a Minuteman volunteer was pushed to the ground at a protest in IN. Freedom Folks and Miff's Chronicles have details. And DailyKos' Cafeoz profiles (satirically) those guarding our northern border.

IRAQ: Old Gray Lady Gets New White Papers

The New York Times reports on a 1/31/03 meeting between Pres. Bush and British PM Tony Blair, at which Bush "made clear" his intentions to go to war with or without a second U.N. resolution and set a 3/10/03 date for entering Iraq. The story is getting a lot of play. Many in the blogosphere see the report as proof that the infamous Downing Street Memo was accurate, including Truth or Consequences, The Peking Duck, DailyKos' Georgia10, Bark Bark Woof Woof and NewsHog, who notes that NYT is catching up to the British media, which reported the story in 2/06.

The left is up in arms over the story. Norwegianity asks: "Can we impeach him now? Not that that would represent any kind of justice. For that we'd need something more like the last fifteen minutes of Braveheart." Brilliant At Breakfast: "Now the rest of the country should know [that the war was fought on false pretenses]. The question is whether they will still choose not to know, because to know is to be obligated to get involved with the political processes necessary to do something about it." Jonathan Schwartz notes that, after this and the original Downing Street Memo, 9 other documents detailing planning of the war in Iraq far in advance of the second U.N. resolution have come to light thus far. Seeing The Forest, Kevin Drum, The Liberal Avenger, The Carpetbagger Report and others post long missives about the story. The Mahablog sums everyone's arguments up and fires back at a few.

Sister Toldjah reasons that Bush knew Saddam would mislead the UN, so of course war was inevitable. Her conclusion: "As usual, the NYT is all about sound and fury, signifying -- well, here I go repeating myself." Captain Ed agrees: "The Times presents us with a memo that shows the US and UK understanding that Saddam would not cooperate with the UN nor voluntarily disarm or step aside; history proved them correct on all those assertions." Confederate Yankee gives NYT credit for "a huge non-story."

SCOTUS: No Need For Argument

SCOTUSBlog, reporting a story that Newsweek has in this week's issue, discusses SCOTUS Justice Antonin Scalia's controversial comments at a 3/8 talk at the University of Freiburg, including everything from Bush v. Gore (Scalia: "Come on, get over it") and Guantanamo detainee rights ("Foreigners, in foreign countries, have no rights under the American Constitution"). The left wants Scalia to recuse himself from the forthcoming review of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the detainee-rights case stemming from treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. Jonathan Singer at MyDD says "Antonin Scalia must recuse himself for prejudging the case." On the right, Captain Ed agrees: "Scalia is, without a doubt, one of the more brilliant legal minds on the bench at any level. However, when it comes to decorum and judicial temperament, it seems that Scalia has some room for improvement." Captain Ed and Singer both point out that Chief Justice Roberts, who wrote the opinion being reviewed while he served on the 4th circuit, has already recused himself. Lefty Big Brass Blog laments the lack of accountability on the court: "Because of the virtual blanket immunity of Supreme Court Justices to consequences from the decisions they render and the conditions of personal belief and professional conduct under which they render those decisions, Mr. Scalia will likely face no material sanction should he proceed with what is now his apparent intention to participate in the adjudication of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld." Righty Ed Whelan, at NRO's Bench Memos, doesn't think Scalia needs to step aside: "The mere fact that a justice has made public comments that would or might have some bearing on a case that comes before the Court has never been regarded as requiring recusal." Stop The ACLU and JunkYardBlog are on Scalia's side. AMERICABlog, Daffodil Lane and Raven's View want him gone. Lefty La'Ikoa offers some advice: "Maybe he should use that "no comment" thing more often." Matthew Franck at NRO's Bench Memos thinks SCOTUS shouldn't take the case to begin with.

AFGHANISTAN: Free At Last

While we briefly mentioned it on Friday, Afghan Abdul Rahman, the Muslim who converted to Christianity, was released this weekend. Captain Ed says the story isn't over: "His best bet is to apply for asylum to the West, preferably the US." Michelle Malkin agrees, and includes a roundup of world reaction to the story. Think Progress faults Sec/State Condoleezza Rice's explanation of why Rahman was release, and offers video of Rice on "Fox News Sunday." RJ Eskow also blames Rice at Huffington Post. Others discussing the situation: Below The Beltway, Jihad Watch, Blogs for Bush, PunditGuy, Power Line, A Blog For All, The Belmont Club and dozens of others.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Gettin' Better All The Time

There was also a lot of buzz this weekend about draft regulations for political blogging, to be voted on by the FEC this a.m. The rules are posted on the FEC's website [PDF]. Election Law's Rick Hasen calls the new rules "the product of thoughtful---and extended---deliberation," and is generally upbeat about them: "This is about everything that the Internet political community could hope for. ... These are very good rules in preserving robust political speech on the internet that takes place without much danger of the corruption of candidates." Hasen's only point of concern is that the FEC failed to require bloggers to post disclaimers when they receive payment from campaigns. Ex-FEC chair Brad Smith, Captain's Quarters, Everything I Know Is Wrong, Adam B at DailyKos, Bob Bauer and Allison Hayward all post interesting takes on the new rules.

LEST WE FORGET: The Secret's Out

Fans of NBC's "The West Wing" (there are some of you out there still, no?) caught a glimpse of the one and only Atrios in the 3/26 episode. Rep./Dem WH nominee Matthew Santos (D-TX) is in the midst of a Philly swing, and his camp arranged a Q&A with the well-read local blogger. It's not exactly the most flattering presentation, however. Coeruleus has a screen capture, and points out: "NBC tells us Atrios is 'not much of a people person.'" Atrios previewed: "Watch NBC make me look like an idiot. ... Ideally it would star me, as me, the dashing young blogger who smites evil, saves the world, and gets the girl, but in reality it's just a brief bit with an actor playing 'Atrios.'" He later jokes: "Not quite as bad as I thought -- Jon Bon Jovi did a really convincing Atrios."

Posted by at March 27, 2006 02:20 PM