Not worth mentioning ?
Here's a quirky little piece that discusses the lapse in reporting around the Plame scandal. As we all know, national papers love a juicy scoop. The Plame matter had all the makings of a political soap: terrorism, a vengeful administration, secret operatives. When Judith Miller et. al, were in the courts pleading for the First Amendment, the press reported every step. When Scooter was indicted for obstruction of justice and perjury, the press was all over it. But, when the person who actually made leak of Plame's identity was revealed (former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage), there was barely a peep. I didn't even hear about this until I read about it in the American Journalism Review. Is this just ignoring the news because it wasn't as tantalizing as a president bent on striking those against his theories of WMD? Or is it that it was the most colossal oops, and the press was too ashamed to admit it?
To read the article click here.
WJ
posted by Medill Media Watch @ 4:05 PM
3 comments
3 Comments:
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
It's not the crime it's the coverup! Though Plame obsessives like me were obviously very interested to learn that it was Richard Armitage and not Karl Rove who told Robert Novak, it certainly doesn't change the narrative as dramatically as Rem Rieder of AJR seems to think it does.
Cheney's notes indicate that he was devising ways to use Valerie Plame to politically discredit Joseph Wilson. That's ugly and sleazy. Libby, Rove, and very likely Bush and Cheney (who weren't put under oath) then lied about it to Patrick Fitzgerald. That's really sleazy, and that is the story. The Armitage revelation doesn't erase any of that.
[PS, those deleted comments are mine, I was having some weird formatting issues with blogger.]
Post a Comment
<< Home