WaPo ombud demolishes paper’s cover story

[cwo_ghwebb]

The Washington Post tried to explain away its “salons”, which basically sold off-the-record access to the Post’s journalists and government officials for lobbyists, as a misunderstanding and mistaken marketing campaign by one of its executives. WaPo ombud Andrew Alexander demolishes the cover story that made Charles Pelton the fall guy, and clearly shows that both publisher Katharine Weymouth and executive editor Marcus Brauchli not only knew that the salons provoked serious ethics questions, their chosen fall guy raised them before producing the fliers that exposed the program (emphases mine, via Instapundit):

Hot Air » Blog Archive » WaPo ombud demolishes paper’s cover story on WaPimping

This is almost as hilarious as Puffington Post saying they're not in the tank for the Messiah.

[Lenny]

And it's typically liberal to blame the one guy that had ethical questions for the entire deal. Wonder if liberals believe honest people like the view from under the bus as much as no-account dead grandmothers and dishonest preachers.

[EmptyTimCup]

Originally Posted by cwo_ghwebb

This is almost as hilarious as Puffington Post saying they're not in the tank for the Messiah.

Its amusing for the Post to even think that they actually have any credibilty. Very similar to the delusions that the Sulzberger newspaper, the New York Times, is suffering. They like most leftwing propagandists are facing bankruptcy and rightly so. When a share of your stock is less that a McDonald’s Happy Meal, then the end is near.

volsense on July 11, 2009 at 2:03 PM