Washington Post Lets Lobbyists Write Its Stories

[Joanne98]

Anti-Social Security outfit does propaganda, not journalism

1/6/10

The Washington Post's publication of a "news" article written by an organization created to advance an ideological agenda is a troubling reminder of the declining ethical standards at one of the nation's most influential newspapers.

The article, headlined "Support Grows for Tackling Nation's Debt" (12/31/09), was a product of the Fiscal Times, described in an accompanying note as "an independent digital news publication reporting on fiscal, budgetary, healthcare and international economics issues." More accurately, it's a propaganda outlet created and funded by Peter G. Peterson, a Wall Street billionaire and Nixon administration cabinet member who has long used his wealth to promote cuts in Social Security and other entitlement programs (Extra!, 3-4/97; Nation.com, 1/4/10).

Peterson has advanced this agenda by launching groups like the Concord Coalition and the Peter G. Peterson Foundation; he's also funded media projects like the public television show World Focus (FAIR Action Alert, 2/10/09) and the deceptive documentary IOUSA (CEPR, 10/8), which aired on CNN.

Now Peterson has a new vehicle, the Fiscal Times, which he describes (PR Newswire, 12/17/09) as "a new entity whose time has come, an independently supported publication comprised of top journalists and opinion makers covering the critical economic issues of our time." The Fiscal Times' initial news release said Peterson "helped found the publication and will provide its initial funding"; editor-in-chief Jackie Leo (formerly of Reader's Digest) said she aimed to make it "the most trusted news source for unbiased journalism covering government policy and economic issues."

Based on the Fiscal Times' first offering in the Post, though, what it actually offers is a bias that's widely shared by corporate media outlets. The piece, by Elaine S. Povich and Eric Pianin, takes it as a given that the "tough decisions that will be required to dig the nation out of debt" include "painful spending cuts and tax increases"--and when they say "spending cuts," they're talking about the "skyrocketing spending on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security," not the $663 billion military budget. (See Guardian, 1/4/10, for Dean Baker's debunking of the piece's Petersonian economics.)

Of course, this kind of deficit-mongering is par for the course in outlets like the Post (Extra!, 9/09). But it's doubtful that the Post on its own would have made controversial claims about powerful politicians--like the assertion that "President Obama has voiced support" for an entitlement-slashing commission, or that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi "has signaled in recent weeks that she could accept the establishment" of such a panel--without offering any substantiation (Fire Dog Lake, 1/5/10).

And it's remarkable that no one at the Post objected when a news outlet funded by Peterson managed to plug two of its benefactor's other ideological projects--the Concord Coalition and the Peterson-Pew Commission on Budget Reform--without noting the financial connection. (The Post ran a correction noting that it should have noted the tie to Concord, but didn't say anything about Peterson-Pew.) Completely missing from the piece was any balance to the Peterson-approved perspective, save an analyst from the AARP, misleadingly cited to suggest that "critics" objected to a deficit commission because it wouldn't be strong enough when "the choices are so hard--and getting harder."

Far from "unbiased journalism," the Fiscal Times article reads like the smoothly written propaganda you'd expect to get from a well-funded lobbying outlet. The Post's "partnership" with this outfit is an ill-advised experiment that ought to be brought to a swift conclusion.

continued>>>
http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframe.php?linkid=104549

I remember back in the 70's when journalism was the most respected career thank's to the Pentagon Papers and Watergate. We could sleep well at night knowing the if evil tried to take over our government the media would save us. How times have changed.

[geckosfeet]

1. My rec canceled out an unrec. But to the point, IMO, lobbyists and 'think tanks'

and outright spin organizations provide much of what we hear, read and see through the media.

A nicely formatted official looking piece of copy makes its way into some newsroom. Doesn't matter where. Some producer or talking head decides to put the non-vetted piece of copy on the air as part of a news show. Consequently hundreds of thousands if not millions of people see it, and truth and reality careen even further down some dark side street.

[scarletwoman]

2. I am utterly astonished that there are people unrec'ing this article!

Even when I rec'd it, it stayed negative. WTF?!?

People fucking better wake the fuck up! The neo-libs are no better than the neocons when it comes to perpetuating and protecting the plutocracy. The masses of struggling citizens who aren't members of the wealthy .01% are just herd animals to them, good for only milking or slaughter.

NO ONE in power is on our side, NO ONE.

sw

[rgbecker]

3. And once again it takes an online reporter to call them out on it.

The Newspapers are whining about how is the new media, the internet, going to uphold the high standards of journalism that have run this country for years! Seems we are going to have a better chance of getting the truth when we have access to the information as on the internet, reviewed and criticized freely and openly. Good catch opednews.com.

[peacetalksforall]

4. I equate this maneuver to the Washington Times taking over the Washington Post.

This ain't journalism.

Keep this in your memory everyone = Fiscal Times.

Expose it to others.

Geez, creating quotes of key people.

That's cheating, robbing, and killing minds.

Making xxxx up is an old tactic = it took off like a cyclone during the Clinton administration.

The Washington Post is now more viral than before?

[UpInArms]

5. the Whoreshington Post is a piece of trash

and that Woodward POS is nothing but a garbage-filled cretin who profits from war - these people should burn in hell if there is one.