My take on the Newsweek flack - "anonymous sources"

[housewolf]

Whether Newsweek got the story right or wrong, as I see it all the hullabaloo is about this:

Anonymous sources


The administration has been complaining for years about the media publishing information from anonymous sources. This is their chance to go after it.

People like David Gergen have been on tv all day, railing against stories being published from "anonymous sources." I think we are about to see an even further tightening of information coming out about the admin that they don't want out. They've got the media right where they want them now, in a perfect position to squeeze them and get them to stop publishing stories from anonymous sources.

[billbuckhead]

1. It discredits the media in general & is punishment to the Washington Post

who pushed Memogate and also owns Newsweak. They poison the well for future investigations by the MSM being taken seriously by the public.

[pacalo]

2. I think you've hit the nail on the head.

[TexasLawyer]

3. probably right

Investigative reports (not that there are that many these days anyway) will be much harder to run in the major news outlets.

Hopefully publications like the New Yorker will stay brave. The stories by Seymour Hersh are largely sourced with insiders wishing to remain anonymous. The big Hersh story on the impending airstrike on Iran (Project Daniel) is one that Bushco really doesn't want to see in the papers anymore.

[suffragette]

4. agree

They squeeze both the media and the sources and scare both away from finding and cooperating with each other.
No new Deep Throat and no new Watergate.
That's probably their hope anyway. I hope people like KO will continue to cut through the BS and note when a situation like this "smells."