Comments on: Confidential to Michael Fletcher, Washington Post http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/ Your Life Beyond The Capitol Sat, 20 Mar 2010 21:48:08 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Rich http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4693 Rich Wed, 11 Feb 2009 01:44:57 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4693 It made for pretty good water cooler talk at the office - more than a few people poked fun at the "Penetrating, insightful journalism" of the rep for the Washington Post. Seriously - that's the best the Post could come up with in that venue? I would have expected better from Entertainment Tonight or People Magazine. It made for pretty good water cooler talk at the office – more than a few people poked fun at the “Penetrating, insightful journalism” of the rep for the Washington Post.

Seriously – that’s the best the Post could come up with in that venue? I would have expected better from Entertainment Tonight or People Magazine.

]]> By: Wayan http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4689 Wayan Wed, 11 Feb 2009 00:52:46 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4689 Holly *bleep*! You mean the WaPo asked about ARod? What lows. How about -insert anything- instead? My Q: Mr. President, do you support full DC statehood with 3 voting representatives, or no representation but also no taxation, like Puerto Rico? Holly *bleep*! You mean the WaPo asked about ARod? What lows. How about -insert anything- instead?

My Q: Mr. President, do you support full DC statehood with 3 voting representatives, or no representation but also no taxation, like Puerto Rico?

]]> By: Don http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4675 Don Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:03:43 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4675 I think you're in the minority opinion here, Geb; I'm not aware of any newspapers that don't have editorial pages, though I am sure there must be a few. There's certainly not the norm though. You may well get your wish, however, given the state of the newspaper business. It could very well shake out that the only news reporting operations to survive will be organizations like the AP who simply write stories. I'd bet my bottom dollar, however, that they'll end up aggregated by organization that will editorialize and, inevitably, endorse candidates. I think you’re in the minority opinion here, Geb; I’m not aware of any newspapers that don’t have editorial pages, though I am sure there must be a few. There’s certainly not the norm though.

You may well get your wish, however, given the state of the newspaper business. It could very well shake out that the only news reporting operations to survive will be organizations like the AP who simply write stories. I’d bet my bottom dollar, however, that they’ll end up aggregated by organization that will editorialize and, inevitably, endorse candidates.

]]> By: Geb http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4670 Geb Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:10:08 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4670 Newspapers shouldn't endorse any candidate whether it is editorial or coverage. Putting up the WaPo’s mission statement is about as worthless as Bernie Madoff’s mission statement promising 10% to 20% returns. Things don’t always work out the way we want them to. Newspapers shouldn’t endorse any candidate whether it is editorial or coverage. Putting up the WaPo’s mission statement is about as worthless as Bernie Madoff’s mission statement promising 10% to 20% returns. Things don’t always work out the way we want them to.

]]> By: Don http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4667 Don Tue, 10 Feb 2009 15:31:58 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4667 The fact that the paper endorsed Obama shouldn't have any impact on their coverage of him. Editorial policy doesn't impact news coverage, something that's both a standard newspaper ethics position <a href="http://www.asne.org/ideas/codes/washingtonpost.htm" rel="nofollow">and a stated one by the WaPo.</a> "G. Opinion On this newspaper, the separation of news columns from the editorial and opposite-editorial pages is solemn and complete. This separation is intended to serve the reader, who is entitled to the facts in the news columns and to opinions on the editorial and “op-ed” pages." The fact that the paper endorsed Obama shouldn’t have any impact on their coverage of him. Editorial policy doesn’t impact news coverage, something that’s both a standard newspaper ethics position and a stated one by the WaPo.

“G. Opinion

On this newspaper, the separation of news columns from the editorial and opposite-editorial pages is solemn and complete. This separation is intended to serve the reader, who is entitled to the facts in the news columns and to opinions on the editorial and “op-ed” pages.”

]]> By: Geb http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4664 Geb Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:49:57 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4664 The question was stupid but it did rattle Obama a little bit, I'm sure he was thing ‘are you serious’. The WaPo openly endorsed Obama, a question challenging his policies was not expected either. The WaPo did a good job because the day everyone is talking about them. In my opinion the real surprise of the night was the Huffington Post being legitimized by being allowed to ask a question. Hating Bush is a full time job and Obama needed to return the favor. The question was stupid but it did rattle Obama a little bit, I’m sure he was thing ‘are you serious’. The WaPo openly endorsed Obama, a question challenging his policies was not expected either. The WaPo did a good job because the day everyone is talking about them.
In my opinion the real surprise of the night was the Huffington Post being legitimized by being allowed to ask a question. Hating Bush is a full time job and Obama needed to return the favor.

]]> By: Mike http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4656 Mike Tue, 10 Feb 2009 05:14:06 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4656 Did you see the double-take of 95% of the other reporters around Michael Fletcher when he posed what I consider to be the most ridiculous question ever asked a President considering the real and urgent issues of the day. The look on FOX News Channel's Major Garrett face expressed what ALL sensible people were feeling.. . "YOU CAN'T BE F...ING SERIOUS"! That's like giving a devout Catholic a chance to ask the Pope a direct question, and what comes out of their mouth is "What are your feelings about artificial turf"? Give this reporter his own show. MEDIA IS DEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Did you see the double-take of 95% of the other reporters around Michael Fletcher when he posed what I consider to be the most ridiculous question ever asked a President considering the real and urgent issues of the day. The look on FOX News Channel’s Major Garrett face expressed what ALL sensible people were feeling.. . “YOU CAN’T BE F…ING SERIOUS”! That’s like giving a devout Catholic a chance to ask the Pope a direct question, and what comes out of their mouth is “What are your feelings about artificial turf”? Give this reporter his own show. MEDIA IS DEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

]]> By: Tom Bridge http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4653 Tom Bridge Tue, 10 Feb 2009 03:41:47 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4653 It's a really kickass toolbag, too. It’s a really kickass toolbag, too.

]]> By: erik http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4652 erik Tue, 10 Feb 2009 03:40:40 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4652 hey that's my toolbag.... hey that’s my toolbag….

]]> By: Tom Bridge http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4649 Tom Bridge Tue, 10 Feb 2009 03:28:56 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4649 @Robert Breaking News On has the <a href="http://www.bnonews.com/news/101.html" rel="nofollow">transcript of the event on their site</a>, here's the appropriate excerpt: THE PRESIDENT: Michael Fletcher, The Washington Post. Michael Fletcher: Yes, thank you, sir. What is your reaction to Alex Rodriguez's admission that he used steroids as a member of the Texas Rangers? @Robert

Breaking News On has the transcript of the event on their site, here’s the appropriate excerpt:

THE PRESIDENT: Michael Fletcher, The Washington Post.

Michael Fletcher: Yes, thank you, sir. What is your reaction to Alex Rodriguez’s admission that he used steroids as a member of the Texas Rangers?

]]> By: Tom Bridge http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4648 Tom Bridge Tue, 10 Feb 2009 03:21:26 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4648 You totally win, Brian, that's the best explanation yet. You totally win, Brian, that’s the best explanation yet.

]]> By: Brian http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4647 Brian Tue, 10 Feb 2009 03:20:41 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4647 I got it! He asked the guess because he's trying to plant the idea of selling steroids to ball-players to stimulate the economy! It's really quite genius, when you stop and think about it... I got it! He asked the guess because he’s trying to plant the idea of selling steroids to ball-players to stimulate the economy! It’s really quite genius, when you stop and think about it…

]]> By: Tom Bridge http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4645 Tom Bridge Tue, 10 Feb 2009 02:53:21 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4645 He said it, and the title flashed on the chyron, at least on CBS. He said it, and the title flashed on the chyron, at least on CBS.

]]> By: Robert Lintott http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4644 Robert Lintott Tue, 10 Feb 2009 02:46:23 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4644 Also, one thing I just thought of. I realize the crux of this is "Why the WaPo?" That's an argument I can understand. That said, I would bet that fewer than 5% of people watching know that the reporter was WaPo (unless Obama said it... I don't remember him doing that, but he did for some, so I could be wrong) Also, one thing I just thought of. I realize the crux of this is “Why the WaPo?” That’s an argument I can understand. That said, I would bet that fewer than 5% of people watching know that the reporter was WaPo (unless Obama said it… I don’t remember him doing that, but he did for some, so I could be wrong)

]]> By: Tom Bridge http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4642 Tom Bridge Tue, 10 Feb 2009 02:22:27 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4642 By that logic, let's send Wilbon or Kornheiser to future Pressers then. Or, maybe, ESPN? By that logic, let’s send Wilbon or Kornheiser to future Pressers then. Or, maybe, ESPN?

]]> By: Robert Lintott http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4641 Robert Lintott Tue, 10 Feb 2009 02:06:55 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4641 Certainly it's a bullshit question in the grand scheme of things, but people _do_ care, despite what most of us think. The Post got some info on something that the President has a known stake in (sports: see his comment on the BCS, on Baseball, etc) and the nation got 58 minutes of more Barack on the Economy and Foreign Affairs. We know what his positions there are, but it is good to hear it more. Nevertheless, it's also not terrible to take a lighthearted minute (maybe it was two). Maybe take everyone's minds off of the econ. for a minute. And regardless, the Post just got a quote that no one else was getting (granted everyone _got_ it, but wouldn't have if it hadn't been asked.) Certainly it’s a bullshit question in the grand scheme of things, but people _do_ care, despite what most of us think.

The Post got some info on something that the President has a known stake in (sports: see his comment on the BCS, on Baseball, etc) and the nation got 58 minutes of more Barack on the Economy and Foreign Affairs. We know what his positions there are, but it is good to hear it more.

Nevertheless, it’s also not terrible to take a lighthearted minute (maybe it was two). Maybe take everyone’s minds off of the econ. for a minute. And regardless, the Post just got a quote that no one else was getting (granted everyone _got_ it, but wouldn’t have if it hadn’t been asked.)

]]> By: Matt http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4640 Matt Tue, 10 Feb 2009 02:01:49 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4640 That question really pissed me off too. There's so much going on right now that A-Rod taking steroids should only be covered during the 90 seconds of sports coverage on local news and on ESPN/CSN. Now I am fairly liberal, but the government should not be wasting any of its time or money on baseball. Selig gets 17 million a year; this is his turd to deal with. That question really pissed me off too. There’s so much going on right now that A-Rod taking steroids should only be covered during the 90 seconds of sports coverage on local news and on ESPN/CSN.

Now I am fairly liberal, but the government should not be wasting any of its time or money on baseball. Selig gets 17 million a year; this is his turd to deal with.

]]> By: Tom Bridge http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4639 Tom Bridge Tue, 10 Feb 2009 02:01:41 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4639 It's a bullshit question. In a National Spotlight, he made our hometown paper look provincial and uninterested in important news and rather interested in trivia. It’s a bullshit question. In a National Spotlight, he made our hometown paper look provincial and uninterested in important news and rather interested in trivia.

]]> By: Robert Lintott http://www.welovedc.com/2009/02/09/confidential-to-michael-fletcher-washington-post/comment-page-1/#comment-4638 Robert Lintott Tue, 10 Feb 2009 01:59:48 +0000 http://www.welovedc.com/?p=9651#comment-4638 Why not ask it? It's on the nation's mind (at least anyone who cares about sports) and this is a president who has made it very clear that he's a big sports guy. Obama's stances on all the other stuff are well-known. Sure, we can get a soundbite here tonight, but nothing earth-shattering. And no, I don't think ARod is more pressing than anything else, but it is a legit question and might actually get us an answer we don't already know. Why not ask it? It’s on the nation’s mind (at least anyone who cares about sports) and this is a president who has made it very clear that he’s a big sports guy. Obama’s stances on all the other stuff are well-known. Sure, we can get a soundbite here tonight, but nothing earth-shattering. And no, I don’t think ARod is more pressing than anything else, but it is a legit question and might actually get us an answer we don’t already know.

]]>