5 ms·
> Could Baron have done the right thing given the ambit of the Post's newsroom, and the Editorial Page also the right thing in putting forward the argument agai
by jsmthrowaway 10y ago
> Could Baron have done the right thing given the ambit of the Post's newsroom, and the Editorial Page also the right thing in putting forward the argument against blanket clemency?
No. There is no dissonance here whatsoever.
Editorial just cost WaPo an unfathomable number of sources. If you're playing the right move game and consider solely the masthead's interest, carpetbombing loyalty to sources is an extremely stupid move for a masthead to make. I think this is something Greenwald missed given his characterization of WaPo acting in its own self interest; the editorial is inexplicable in that frame of reference.
There is more to it, without question.
I bet Barton Gellman is having a good day.
- tptacek 10y agoI'm even less interested in the argument about whether it was in the Post's best interests to publish this.
- jsmthrowaway 10y agoEditorial exists to advocate for the interests of the paper. That's the key.
- tptacek 10y agoI disagree that that's the point of the Editorial Page.
- jsmthrowaway 10y agoThen you're wrong and arguing a definition of 'opinion' that appears in no dictionary of which I am aware. Mine is not a controversial statement within the industry, so I'm rather surprised to run into an argument and pushback outside. What do people think editorials are? They have this opinion for a reason and were willing to bite a source to advance it. Follow the reason.
- tptacek 10y agoI have no trouble believing that there are lots of HN people that think this is somehow all about Bezos.
- jsmthrowaway 10y agoUh, no, but thanks for feeding me an opinion that I don't have. Jeff Bezos didn't even enter this picture for me. You're better than this, come on. WaPo considered its network of government-friendly sources against a single, prominent government-unfriendly source. That's the calculus and why they can't advocate his pardon. I'm not writing a Dan Brown novel here and I'm pretty annoyed with you straw manning me to your preferred target. This would be like Barbara Starr biting Defense. Is this really news to you, that the Washington Post tends to maintain formation with the city in its name?
- tptacek 10y agoSorry, I thought you were referring to other comments on this thread about Bezos in solidarity. I took a rhetorical shortcut that didn't work out for me. I do not understand this cui bono logic. I think it's the role of an Editorial Page to take positions on matters of current events and public policy, and do so so in good faith (ie, to relate the genuinely held and reasonably informed opinions of the staff). My take on the role of an Editorial Page seems like it's pretty much the opposite of your take, which is that the Editorial Page exists to advance the interests of the paper itself.