Time Gives Up on the Truth

by emptywheel

The whole Joe Klein affair is another of the things I'm hoping to return to on Monday. But for now, take a look at their "correction."

In the original version of this story, Joe Klein wrote that the House Democratic version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) would allow a court review of individual foreign surveillance targets. Republicans believe the bill can be interpreted that way, but Democrats don't.

Never mind that the entire offending paragraph remains intact:

The Democratic strategy on the FISA legislation in the House is equally foolish. There is broad, bipartisan agreement on how to legalize the surveillance of phone calls and emails of foreign intelligence targets. The basic principle is this: if a suspicious pattern of calls from a terrorist suspect to a U.S. citizen is found, a FISA court warrant is necessary to monitor those communications. But to safeguard against civil-liberty abuses, all records of clearly nontargeted Americans who receive emails or phone calls from foreign suspects would be, in effect, erased. Unfortunately, Speaker Nancy Pelosi quashed the House Intelligence Committee's bipartisan effort and supported a Democratic bill that — Limbaugh is salivating — House Republicans believe would require the surveillance of every foreign-terrorist target's calls to be approved by the FISA court, an institution founded to protect the rights of U.S. citizens only. (Democrats dispute this interpretation.) In the lethal shorthand of political advertising, it would give terrorists the same legal protections as Americans. That is well beyond stupid.

Never mind that there are a number of errors, and this "correction" addresses just one.

What does it say that Time, one of the leading news outlets in this country, refuses to try to determine which side is correct in this debate? What does it say that, with the existing bill as the presumed unquestioned arbiter of the debate, they cannot discern truth? What does it say that they continue to refer to human sources--Republicans and Democrats--rather than the text?

I dunno, but I guarantee you, the next time I attend a conference on journalism and blogging, I will take no prisoners.

Comments

[Katie Jensen]

Now that's a blog entry I don't want to miss. When's that next conference??

She walks in wearing leather, the gunslinger who carries a lap top instead of a gun, the fastest fingers in the east. Go get em, Marci!!

[sojourner]

Marcy, I hate to say this but you made a mistake...

It should be "one of the FORMER leading news outlets in this country..."

[Shit Stain Remover]

As a moderate liberal and political reporter, Joe Klein is charged with reporting on the political spin of an issue and not the substance. He can make two phone calls, write-up his notes, file and arrive at the cocktail party in time to sidle up with the kewl kids. This charge also relieves him of responsibility for reading and understanding the text and reconciling the text of as many as two different bills. Joe's special insight is that he implicitly understands "what the American People think and what they want" which puts him in a pretty good position to compare that with the spin from the Democrats and the spin from Republicans in Congress.

[Bob in HI]

We need a better name for faux journalists. "Stenographers" is the current brand, but it may be too recondite for the average reader to understand. How about "psuedo-journalist" for people like Tim Russert who, IIRC, does not claim to be one, but seems to play one on TV? Or how about "journalight" for people who were trained in journalism, but seem to have forgotten everything they learned? Or maybe "journaleast"? Or, on the side of truth in advertising, "infotainest"?

We need to consistently brand these folks for what they are.

Bob in HI

[readerOfTeaLeaves]

Freepatriot's: This charge also relieves him of responsibility for reading and understanding the text and reconciling the text of as many as two different bills. BINGO!!! Reading and understanding? Too much work.

Bob in HI, my vote's for 'infotainest'. And evidently Klein is one of the infotainest guys evah.

[Kagro X]

What does it say that Time, one of the leading news outlets in this country, refuses to try to determine which side is correct in this debate?

What does it say that Time refuses to acknowledge that Klein himself has already determined which side is correct in this "debate?"

Klein has settled the issue in one of his many corrections:

Democrats say that I was wrong to report that the bill includes a FISA court review of individual foreign terrorist targets who might communicate with U.S. persons, although it does include an annual “basket” review of procedures used by U.S. intelligence agencies to target foreign suspects. The Republican Committee staff disagrees and says my reporting is correct.

I have to side with the Democrats.

I have to side with the Democrats.

Bam! STFU, Time editors! Suck it! Game over!

So now the question is, why does Time refuse to acknowledge that the journalist whose beat this was has settled the fucking issue definitively? Why do they bend over backwards to offer a "correction" that flies right in the fucking face of what Klein said?

This "debate" is over. It was bullshit from the start, and now even Klein sees it.

But the editors of Time think it's more important to bail out their overinflated egos than to admit that the Republican party has suckered them into carrying water for the ultimate destruction of the constitutional system.

Fuck the Constitution! I can't be seen as making a mistake! I'm an editor, God damn it!

Fuck you, Time. Fuck you.

[earlofhuntingdon]

Joe Klein's editor, Ms. Painton, hails from Holyoke (class of '80). My. I thought the Seven Sisters had long before rid themselves of both the M.R.S. and secretarial degree courses. Ms. Painton, however, seems delirious at taking dictation. I wonder if she can type?

[Peterr]

Marcy, at that next conference on journalism and bloggers, can you liveblog the non-taking of prisoners?

[Kagro X]

Not only does Painton hail from Holyoke, she taught there. She taught journamalisms, no less.

On this page, the MHC News reports Painton's lessons on Time's "monumental fact-checking operation"

Painton has invited a number of experienced journalists to visit the class throughout the semester. On October 2, two Time colleagues, chief of reporters Jane Bachman Wulf '76 and deputy chief reporter Ratu Kamlani, who supervise the magazine's monumental fact-checking operation, shared their insights on accuracy and truthfulness in reporting. They showed the students examples of fact-checked drafts, explaining that literally every word is reviewed before an article goes to press. "Remember, there's always somebody out there who knows a lot more about the subject than you do," Painton interjected. "Don't get distracted by the 'wow factor.' Nerd-proof yourself."

Oops. I just got distracted by the "wow factor" of how badly Painton sucks at applying her own "lessons."

[phred]

Damn it! That's what I get for being polite to the representatives of the NYT at the LAST hand-wringing-palms-sweating-Dear-God-what's-happening-to-journalism (with a token blogger ;) conference. Only problem was the folks on the stage (with one exception) appeared to have a different take on what the underlying problem is (bloggers) than the audience (stenography coupled with Wall Street corporate interests prevailing over civic duty). I wanted to take them to task for the shocking credulity of Bill "I've never seen a Miller/Gordon story I didn't like" Keller. But no, I was polite and asked a question about Wall Street's greed crippling newsrooms. Arrrggghhhh! Go get 'em EW, and while you're reading them the riot act, we'll have the exits covered -- take no prisoners and no escape!

Bastards. I used to love reading the paper.

And Kagro, that piece you had on this over at DKos was a thing of beauty. I doff my cap to you sir.

[Ed*ard Teller]

Take No Prisoners, movie, 2008, starring Emptywheel, music by Ennio Morricone...

[JIm Hicks]

And when and where is the next conference (east coast) going to be? I'm all for more blood on the stage. Way too much bending over backwards to be fair. Might as well just bend over.

[Mad Dogs]

Shorter Time: "Liar, liar, pants on fire!"

[MrX]

stenographers are trained to accurately transcribe meetings/conversations. Don't taint their vocation by lumping them in with the likes of JoeK. If we're looking for a word to describe JoeK's ilk, how about opinaters, since they're not educated enough to be pundits, and are mostly spreading opinions, theirs and others?

It's a nonce word, but I think it has a nice ring to it.

[hauksdottir]

inkslingers! (throw words around, and see what sticks and what evaporates)

cacographers! (unreadable shit?)

duplicators! (this has a nice echo of dupes, endlessly repeating without understanding or verifying the message)

[tekel]

I like cacagraphers. Or infotaints.

[tekel]

Next time there's a panel, someone should park a truck full of rotten vegetables out front and "donate" a bag to each member of the audience.

[KLynn]

I remember in j-school (a long time ago) we would be "hung" grade-wise for ANY editorializing. EW, looks like you need to lead the way back... A "Back To The Future" journalism-style!

[katie Jensen]

Kagro...I also read your article on Kos and it was excellent as well!!

[Jodi]

Some of the histrionic rage from FDL and KOS seems to be leaking over here to TNH.

[Phil]

Scatologists?

[Fatmex]

"...I guarantee you, the next time I attend a conference on journalism and blogging, I will take no prisoners."

For some unknown reason, that last statement above got me all hot and bothered.

Go to it, sister.

[dipper]

I like cacographers too!

[stevedw]

Sadly, I stopped relying on Time Magazine for insightful information a long time ago. It is more like People Magazine than a reliable source.

Keep up your hard work, and thank you for doing it.

[Kagro X]

It was here first, Jodi.

Please see if you can say more stupid shit. I'm dying to know if it can get dumber.

Thank you.