"Gossip has become so much a part of journalism that what he does doesn't stand out."
So says the editor of the WashingtonPost.com, Jim Brady, in a story about Matt Drudge and the Drudge Report in the Los Angeles Times. (My bad: the quote is actually from Frank Rich, a NY Times columnist. See comments)
Let's pause for a moment of silence.
This is a tiny little quote buried in a big front page article. I find it profoundly disturbing. I don't know the Drudge Report well, but for the Washington Post to acknowledge that gossip has become a part of journalism saddens me. Gossip is what Hearst did back in the twenties and thirties. Gossip is what led to McCarthyism and all sorts of evilness. Gossip is why I read newspapers rather than check-out stand tabloids at the market.
Gossip should not be part of journalism!
Here's a quote from further down in the story:
"Even when accuracy is not an issue, some journalists remain concerned about Drudge's influence."
Even when accuracy is not an issue?
When is accuracy NOT AN ISSUE to a journalist?
That's it. I'm moving to a cave.
2 comments:
From the L.A. Times quoting Frank Rich: "Gossip has become so much a part of journalism that what he does doesn't stand out," Rich now says. "My attitude about it has definitely changed. And frankly, I think Drudge has changed, too. He's much more centrist…. I certainly look at the site in my idle moments."
I stand corrected--the quote is from Frank Rich.
Since I was moaning about accuracy not being important, this is an embarrassing error!
Post a Comment