Disclaimer: I know and have worked with a lot of Washington Post reporters and some editors. I happen to like almost all of them and have found them to be fair in both good stories and bad. However …
South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford (R) had his mistress and the Washington Post Co. has hers. Sanford was after love. The Post was after money.
If you haven’t seen, today news broke that The Washington Post was offering “non-confrontational” dinners with Obama administration officials, Congressional big-wigs and Washington Post reporters. All the lobbyists who were targeted for the “salons” had to fork over was $250,000. What recession? you may ask.
When the news hit the Drudge Report this morning, The Washington Post was quick to pull the plug on the affair, blaming “overzealous marketing executives” (isn’t it always?) and saying “the language in the flier” would keep them from attending their own event. The leaders at the paper were quick to express their indignation even though the events were planned with the knowledge of the editor and were to be hosted in her own home!
With the blistering decline of newspaper revenue all around the country, they are all scrambling for cash to stay afloat. In the case of The Washington Post, the newspaper and website are simply loss-leaders for the larger company, which is composed of a number of enterprises ranging from some smaller newspapers to Newsweek to something called Course Adviser, which supposedly helps people choose their career training and higher education. They even own an outlet called, ironically enough, The Big Money. But their crown jewel is the test prep system Kaplan. That’s the moneymaker. This is the expensive system that helps students prepare for the SAT, ACT and medical school. And therein lies the problem.
This is a far-flung, for-profit business enterprise utilizing their loss-leader — their media side — to host intimate “non-confrontational” dinners with high-ranking government officials and the very lobbyists they have spent so much precious ink to vilify … at a quarter of a million dollars a pop! Here’s just one excerpt from a Washington Post editorial about the evils of hosting events with lobbyist dough and lawmakers:
And it’s important that the rules crack down on the really valuable benefits that private interests now provide — events such as convention parties honoring key lawmakers, lobbyist-funded holiday parties … ” (Feb. 9, 2006)
You see, if the Post wants to sell access to reporters, I’m not going to get in too big of a huff over that. But they were primarily selling access to public, elected officials both in Congress and in the White House, similar to the reform they editorialized about. And they are not having events where the proceeds go to a political party or campaign. No, they want to personally profit for the corporation. These are the same people the Fourth Estate is heralded for keeping such a close eye on and the reason the media is shielded in the First Amendment. (I’ll also take this opportunity to point out that lobbyists are also protected in the selfsame amendment to our founding document.)
Clearly, the problem isn’t with the wording of the document. The problem isn’t even in the hypocrisy (although that is very rich). Just like with Sanford, the problem is in the action itself. The problem is profiteering by the Washington Post Co. while hiding behind the shield of journalism.
And it leaves such questions as: What exactly did the editors of the Post know? Will they release the internal e-mails and decisionmaking that went into this calamity? And most importantly, just exactly which Obama administration officials agreed to this and who approached them to request this special-interest favor? Which members of Congress agreed to be feted at Editor Katharine Weymouth’s home, and who were the intermediaries?
As those of us who have handled crises before know, it is not as simple as saying, “I’m sorry, the event is canceled.”