Wapo Reporter Achenbach Defends His Friend's Time Magazine Puff Piece on the Dangerous Glenn Beck

Glenn Beck, GOP, Jamison Foser, Joel Achenbach, Media, Media Matters, Nutjobs, Time Magazine, Washington Post

Glenn BeckM E D I A  M A T T E R S

WaPo reporter and “close friend” of Von Drehle defends Beck profile; attacks me

September 18, 2009 12:06 pm ET – by Jamison Foser

Washington Post reporter Joel Achenbach leaps to his “close friend” David Von Drehle’s defense, calling my criticism of Von Drehle’s Glenn Beck profile “shrill,” and accuses me of criticizing the article “because one of the targets of Dave’s story is Media Matters itself. Which Foser doesn’t bother to note.”

Let’s take that part first: Ludicrous. Von Drehle makes only passing mention of Media Matters; here it is:

“[T]here are ancillary industries feeding on the success of Beck and others like him. Both left- and right-wing not-for-profit groups operate as self-anointed media watchdogs, and one of the largest of these — the liberal group Media Matters for America — has a multimillion-dollar budget. Staff members monitor Beck’s every public utterance, poised to cherry-pick the most inflammatory sentences. (Conservative outfits do the same for the likes of MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann.) These nuggets are used in turn to rev up donations to political parties and drive ratings for the endless rounds of talking-head shows.”

Really? That’s what led Achenbach to conclude that “one of the targets of Dave’s story is Media Matters,” and that I was motivated by a desire for revenge? Seems pretty weak.

Achenbach’s defense of his “close pal” David Von Drehle, and his attack on me, curiously avoids any discussion whatsoever of my central point: That Von Drehle failed to indicate a single falsehood Beck has ever told. That Von Drehle portrayed “liberal” estimates of the size of last week’s anti-Obama rally as no more valid than estimates from conservatives — estimates of 1 to 2 million people. Despite the fact that there clearly were not a million people at the rally. And despite the fact that the “liberal” estimates in fact came from news organizations and the DC fire department.

Since Achenbach ducked all that, here are some simple questions for him:

Time magazine refused to publish responses to Klein's false smears

Stories

wpitw.jpg

Joe Klein is Losing it…..

(updated below)The disgraceful behavior of Time Magazine in the Joe Klein scandal has been well-documented. But new facts have emerged that reveal that Time‘s behavior was far worse than previously thought.

First, Sen. Russ Feingold submitted a letter to Time protesting the false statements in Klein’s article. But Time refused to publish it. Sen. Feingold’s spokesman said that the letter “was submitted to TIME very shortly after Klein’s column ran but the letters department was about as responsive as the column was accurate.”

Just to reveal how corrupt that behavior is, The Chicago Tribune — which previously published the factually false excerpts of Klein’s column and then clearly retracted them — yesterday published Feingold’s letter. As Feingold details — but had to go to the Chicago Tribune‘s Letter section to do it — “Klein calls the Democrats’ position on reforming the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act ‘well beyond stupid’ but without getting his facts straight.” Feingold also said that “Klein is also flat out wrong” in his false claims that there was some “bipartisan agreement” on a bill to vest “new surveillance powers” that House Democrats ignored.

Second, Rep. Rush Holt — before he published his response in The Huffington Post detailing Klein’s false claims — asked that he be given the opportunity to respond to Klein’s false column directly on Time‘s Swampland, where Klein was in the process of making all sorts of statements compounding his errors. But Time also denied Rep. Holt the opportunity to bring his response to the attention of Time‘s readers.

According to Zach Goldberg, Rep. Holt’s spokesman: “Rep. Holt had an email exchange with Mr. Klein about FISA and his column. During the exchange, Rep. Holt made a request to respond with a Swampland post to clarify what is really in the RESTORE Act. Mr. Klein noted he already issued a public apology and did not accept the request.”

Let’s just ponder for a second how lowly Time‘s behavior here is. It refused the requests of two sitting members of Congress, both of whom are members of the Intelligence Committees and have played a central role in drafting the pending FISA legislation, to correct Klein’s false statements in Time itself. What kind of magazine smears its targets with patently false statements and then blocks them from responding?

Making matters much worse is the fact that, as we now know, Klein’s false statements about the House Democrats’ FISA bill was basically ghost-written by GOP Rep. Pete Hoekstra. Klein never quoted a single Democratic proponent of that bill — either in his original false article, his multiple Swampland posts, nor the three separate “corrections” published by Time.

The whole episode was a GOP-fueled smear on Democrats. Yet Time nonetheless refused to allow Congressional Democrats with the greatest knowledge of this matter to bring to the attention of Time‘s readers how false Klein’s statements were, and how false the subsequent “corrections” were. To describe Time‘s behavior is to illustrate how profoundly unethical it is.

Third, at least 100 individuals wrote letters to Time‘s editors protesting Klein’s article and responding to its claims. I know this because that’s how many people (at least) cc’d me on their letters, forwarded them to me, and/or copied their Letters to the Editor in the Comment section here. Managing Editor Rick Stengel’s voice mail and email box overflowed with responses.

Nonetheless, Time — while publishing 15 separate letters on a whole array of topics in its print edition this week — did not see fit to publish a single letter about the Klein falsehoods. At every step, they sought to hide from their readers — and continue to hide from their readers — just how outrageous and severe were Klein’s false statements by suppressing all responses.

Finally, Howard Kurtz of The Washington Post and CNN — who dives head-first into every right-wing blog controversy — has been completely mute about the Klein/Time scandal, even though it was one of the central focuses of blogs for more than a full week and relates directly to the media criticism issues he is ostensibly assigned to cover. Worse, Kurtz has now been asked about this matter by multiple readers in two consecutive weekly Monday chats he hosts at the Post, but has refused to take a single question about it.

Yesterday, at least 15 people submitted questions to Kurtz on the Time/Klein scandal — again, I know this because that’s how many people emailed me their questions or left them in comments — and not a single one was chosen. Kurtz, however, found time to address multiple questions on such pressing matters as the new Don Imus Show and football.

It’s hardly difficult to understand why Kurtz has joined with the Time editors to steadfastly suppress any effort to expose the behavior of Klein and Time:

Time published blatantly false statements from Klein, refused (and refuses) to retract them, and then bolstered those false claims with a further false claim that Klein had a solid basis for making them. Worse still, they refused to allow even a Senator and a Congressman on the Intelligence Committees — who were the targets of Klein’s smears — to defend themselves and explain in Time why Klein’s accusations were false.

And they (and their corporate minions such as Kurtz) are taking every step possible to ensure that their readers never become aware of what happened. Is it time yet to hear more about how dangerous bloggers are because they operate with no standards?

UPDATE: I just learned that in addition to all of the above, a letter was also sent to Time jointly from House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes. Although they communicated with Time in advance and advised them that the letter was coming, Time has not published this letter either.

Prior to posting this, I asked Time to comment on these matters and was told they “will get back to [me] as soon as possible.” I wasn’t interested in waiting longer, so I sent the Time PR person a link to this column and advised her that “unlike Time, I’m happy to post a comment in response to this.” If and when I receive a response from Time, I will post it.

— Glenn Greenwald