Sunday, November 13, 2005
Pinch Speaks
10 November 2005 on Charlie Rose (taken from The Drudge Report). I dunno, always Pinch was a complete dope in his way or maybe he's just totally and delberately lying his face off (so to speak). Of course the biggest difference between the Blair matter and the Miller matter is that Judy's his buddy, still. And really, that's his sole criterion.
The fluctuates between clueless and simply dishonest. I have wondered for years and continue to wonder: how can he manage any major journalistic medium?
EXCERPT #1
CR>> HAS THIS HAS BEEN TOUGH NOT JUST FOR YOU, BUT FOR THE FAMILY.
AS >> YOU KNOW, I'VE GOT TO SAY, MY FAMILY, GOD BLESS MY FAMILY. THEY ARE A BULLWARK. THIS PALES BY COMPARISON TO THE JASON BLAIR, IT'S NOT EVEN ON THE SAME SCALE. JASON BLAIR AND THE ISSUES THAT FLOW FROM THAT, THOSE WERE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES INVOLVING NOT JUST A REPORTER, BUT A WHOLE SERIES IN "THE NEW YORK TIMES." THAT WAS HARD. AND MY FAMILY STOOD BY ME LIKE A BULLWARK. AND THEY DID THIS TIME, TOO. WE JUST HAD A FAMILY REUNION. WE HAVE FAMILY REUNIONS. AND I WAS DOWN AT CHATTANOOGA WITH MEMBERS OF THE FAMILY FROM ALL GENERATIONS, WE ALL SAT DOWN ONE MORNING IN A RESTAURANT AND JUST TALKED ABOUT THIS.
CR>> WHAT WAS THAT CONVERSATION LIKE?
AS>> IT WAS FABULOUS. THEY WERE CONFUSED AS MOST PEOPLE ARE BECAUSE IS THIS A CONFUSING SET OF SCENARIOS. AND A CONFUSING TIME. WE FOCUSED FOR ALMOST 40 MINUTES, I'M GOING TO GUESS, BUT WHO'S COUNTING ON WHAT IS RATHER A SMALL BORE ISSUE IN THE BIG SCHEME OF THINGS.
CR>> BUT IT'S NOT A SMALL ISSUE IF "THE NEW YORK TIMES" REPORTERS AND PEOPLE WHO INHABIT THAT BUILDING CONSIDER IT A BIG ISSUE. IT'S A BIG ISSUE.
AS>> NO, IT'S A BIG ISSUE IF YOUR READERS LOOSE TRUST AND RESPECT AND DEVALUE THE JOURNALISM THAT THEY'RE GETTING.
CR>>IS IT AN ISSUE? AS>>AND THE ANSWER IS, NO,
EXCERPT #2
AS >> LET'S SEPARATE TWO ELEMENTS THAT I THINK HAVE BECOME TOO MUCH ENTANGLED. THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION COVERAGE WHICH WE RAN THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO AND RAN A MAJOR EDITOR'S NOTE A YEAR AGO. AND THE VALERIE PLAME CASE. THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT ELEMENTS. THEY BOTH INVOLVE A REPORTER NAMED JUDY MILLER. BUT ONE HAD VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH THE OTHER.
AS<
EXCERPT #3
AS>>AND WE DIDN'T BRING THE DEGREE OF EDITORIAL SKEPTICISM WE SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT TO THAT STORY.
CR>> SKEPTICISM AND SUPERVISION?
AS>> PERHAPS ONE IS REALLY THE SAME. I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT THOSE STORIES WOULD NOT HAVE RUN IN "THE NEW YORK TIMES" TODAY.
EXCERPT #4
AS>> JUDY IS SEEN THROUGH A HIGHLY POLITICAL PRISM, IF SHE CAME BACK TO "THE NEW YORK TIMES" TO WRITE RESTAURANT REVIEW, I'M CONVINCED THE FIRST TIME SHE GAVE A REVIEW OF A RESTAURANT, SOMEBODY WOULD DECLARE THERE'S A POLITICAL VIEW BEHIND THAT. IT SIMPLY MEANT THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE DIFFICULT TO INTEGRATE HER BACK IN AS A REPORTER.
EXCERPT #5
CR>>THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, WE DEALT WITH THAT ISSUE. SO SHE REALLY DID RETIRE.
AS>>AS YOU KNOW, WE TALKED EARLIER, ABOUT BUYOUTS IN THE NEWSROOM, AND WE HAD THEM. THERE WAS A BUYOUT PROCESS IN PLACE THAT JUDY TAPPED INTO. AND THE TRUTH IS, THIS IS THE RIGHT TIME. SHE'S BECOME TOO ENTANGLED WITH THE STORY. SHE KNEW IT. WE KNEW IT.
CR>> WHAT DOES ‘TOO ENTANGLED’ MEAN?
AS>> I SHOULDN'T HAVE USED THAT WORD.
EXCERPT #6
AS>> RIGHT NOW, "THE WASHINGTON POST," WHICH RAN A WONDERFUL SERIES OF A WONDERFUL FRONT-PAGE PIECE TWO OR THREE DAYS AGO ABOUT CIA CAMPS AROUND THE WORLD, HIDDEN, SECRET, PRISON CAMPS THAT WE HAVE ESTABLISHED, APPARENTLY, AROUND THE WORLD. THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO KNOW. IT'S IMPORTANT FOR TO US UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE DOING THAT. WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO RUN A SECRET CAMP IN EASTERN EUROPE? HOW DO WE TREAT OUR PEOPLE THERE, THE PRISONERS THERE? WHAT ARE THEY ACCUSED OF? HOW LONG ARE THEY GOING TO BE THERE? WHAT'S THEIR RIGHT TO A DEFENSE? ALL OF THESE CORE BELIEFS THAT WE CONSIDER SO INTEGRAL TO OUR DEMOCRACY. AND WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN NOW, I FEAR, IS THAT RATHER THAN THE GOVERNMENT SAYING, ALL RIGHT, WE KNOW AMERICA AN EXPLANATION ON THIS, THEY'RE GOING TO CREATE A SPECIAL COUNCIL. ALL OF A SUDDEN, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A "WASHINGTON POST" REPORTER OR TWO OR THREE WHO ARE GOING TO BE ASKED TO GIVE UP THEIR SECRET SOURCES. THIS IS WHAT'S AT STAKE.
The fluctuates between clueless and simply dishonest. I have wondered for years and continue to wonder: how can he manage any major journalistic medium?
EXCERPT #1
CR>> HAS THIS HAS BEEN TOUGH NOT JUST FOR YOU, BUT FOR THE FAMILY.
AS >> YOU KNOW, I'VE GOT TO SAY, MY FAMILY, GOD BLESS MY FAMILY. THEY ARE A BULLWARK. THIS PALES BY COMPARISON TO THE JASON BLAIR, IT'S NOT EVEN ON THE SAME SCALE. JASON BLAIR AND THE ISSUES THAT FLOW FROM THAT, THOSE WERE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES INVOLVING NOT JUST A REPORTER, BUT A WHOLE SERIES IN "THE NEW YORK TIMES." THAT WAS HARD. AND MY FAMILY STOOD BY ME LIKE A BULLWARK. AND THEY DID THIS TIME, TOO. WE JUST HAD A FAMILY REUNION. WE HAVE FAMILY REUNIONS. AND I WAS DOWN AT CHATTANOOGA WITH MEMBERS OF THE FAMILY FROM ALL GENERATIONS, WE ALL SAT DOWN ONE MORNING IN A RESTAURANT AND JUST TALKED ABOUT THIS.
CR>> WHAT WAS THAT CONVERSATION LIKE?
AS>> IT WAS FABULOUS. THEY WERE CONFUSED AS MOST PEOPLE ARE BECAUSE IS THIS A CONFUSING SET OF SCENARIOS. AND A CONFUSING TIME. WE FOCUSED FOR ALMOST 40 MINUTES, I'M GOING TO GUESS, BUT WHO'S COUNTING ON WHAT IS RATHER A SMALL BORE ISSUE IN THE BIG SCHEME OF THINGS.
CR>> BUT IT'S NOT A SMALL ISSUE IF "THE NEW YORK TIMES" REPORTERS AND PEOPLE WHO INHABIT THAT BUILDING CONSIDER IT A BIG ISSUE. IT'S A BIG ISSUE.
AS>> NO, IT'S A BIG ISSUE IF YOUR READERS LOOSE TRUST AND RESPECT AND DEVALUE THE JOURNALISM THAT THEY'RE GETTING.
CR>>IS IT AN ISSUE? AS>>AND THE ANSWER IS, NO,
EXCERPT #2
AS >> LET'S SEPARATE TWO ELEMENTS THAT I THINK HAVE BECOME TOO MUCH ENTANGLED. THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION COVERAGE WHICH WE RAN THREE OR FOUR YEARS AGO AND RAN A MAJOR EDITOR'S NOTE A YEAR AGO. AND THE VALERIE PLAME CASE. THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT ELEMENTS. THEY BOTH INVOLVE A REPORTER NAMED JUDY MILLER. BUT ONE HAD VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH THE OTHER.
AS<
EXCERPT #3
AS>>AND WE DIDN'T BRING THE DEGREE OF EDITORIAL SKEPTICISM WE SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT TO THAT STORY.
CR>> SKEPTICISM AND SUPERVISION?
AS>> PERHAPS ONE IS REALLY THE SAME. I THINK IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT THOSE STORIES WOULD NOT HAVE RUN IN "THE NEW YORK TIMES" TODAY.
EXCERPT #4
AS>> JUDY IS SEEN THROUGH A HIGHLY POLITICAL PRISM, IF SHE CAME BACK TO "THE NEW YORK TIMES" TO WRITE RESTAURANT REVIEW, I'M CONVINCED THE FIRST TIME SHE GAVE A REVIEW OF A RESTAURANT, SOMEBODY WOULD DECLARE THERE'S A POLITICAL VIEW BEHIND THAT. IT SIMPLY MEANT THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE DIFFICULT TO INTEGRATE HER BACK IN AS A REPORTER.
EXCERPT #5
CR>>THE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, WE DEALT WITH THAT ISSUE. SO SHE REALLY DID RETIRE.
AS>>AS YOU KNOW, WE TALKED EARLIER, ABOUT BUYOUTS IN THE NEWSROOM, AND WE HAD THEM. THERE WAS A BUYOUT PROCESS IN PLACE THAT JUDY TAPPED INTO. AND THE TRUTH IS, THIS IS THE RIGHT TIME. SHE'S BECOME TOO ENTANGLED WITH THE STORY. SHE KNEW IT. WE KNEW IT.
CR>> WHAT DOES ‘TOO ENTANGLED’ MEAN?
AS>> I SHOULDN'T HAVE USED THAT WORD.
EXCERPT #6
AS>> RIGHT NOW, "THE WASHINGTON POST," WHICH RAN A WONDERFUL SERIES OF A WONDERFUL FRONT-PAGE PIECE TWO OR THREE DAYS AGO ABOUT CIA CAMPS AROUND THE WORLD, HIDDEN, SECRET, PRISON CAMPS THAT WE HAVE ESTABLISHED, APPARENTLY, AROUND THE WORLD. THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO KNOW. IT'S IMPORTANT FOR TO US UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE DOING THAT. WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO RUN A SECRET CAMP IN EASTERN EUROPE? HOW DO WE TREAT OUR PEOPLE THERE, THE PRISONERS THERE? WHAT ARE THEY ACCUSED OF? HOW LONG ARE THEY GOING TO BE THERE? WHAT'S THEIR RIGHT TO A DEFENSE? ALL OF THESE CORE BELIEFS THAT WE CONSIDER SO INTEGRAL TO OUR DEMOCRACY. AND WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN NOW, I FEAR, IS THAT RATHER THAN THE GOVERNMENT SAYING, ALL RIGHT, WE KNOW AMERICA AN EXPLANATION ON THIS, THEY'RE GOING TO CREATE A SPECIAL COUNCIL. ALL OF A SUDDEN, YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A "WASHINGTON POST" REPORTER OR TWO OR THREE WHO ARE GOING TO BE ASKED TO GIVE UP THEIR SECRET SOURCES. THIS IS WHAT'S AT STAKE.
Website Counters
