Replies to WaPo Ombudsman disappear down memory hole (but we got 'em!)

[Skinner]

At 11:30AM today, Deborah Howell -- the Washington Post Ombudsman -- posted a message on the Washington Post blog defending/clarifying her assertion that Jack Abramoff gave money to both parties. You can see her message here:

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/washpostblog/2006/01/deborah_howell_.html

Until 4:00PM, visitors had the opportunity to post responses to Ms. Howell. But those comments -- almost universally critical -- mysteriously disappeared. Fortunately, I just happened to have my browser window open when they disappeared down the memory hole. The page is saved for posterity here, for your reading enjoyment:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/archive/2006/wapo

Check it out.

UPDATE: It apears that this was deliberate. Here's their most recent post: "Comments Turned Off - As of 4:15pm ET today, we have shut off comments on this blog indefinitely." Link

[rodeodance]

1. thanks

[InsultComicDog]

148. Speak Truth To Power!! k/r

:kick:

[InsultComicDog]

152. Here's Howell's Direct Email: [e-mail]

[e-mail]

:kick:

May as well fill that box up too

[FourStarDemocrat]

167. Thanks, and we should email all the WP editors the link to this thread. n/

[trotsky]

2. Skinner, I know it's been said, many times, many ways...

YOU ROCK.

[chat_noir]

3. Good job!

What else is in the DU archive?

[InsultComicDog]

154. Very good job

Those comments in many cases took people quite a long time to think about and research, and for the Post to remove them and scold us all like little children who are misbehaving is not something we should respond to kindly.

[Chimichurri]

4. This is why I LOVE DU! Great save! Thank you.

[rodeodance]

5. here is her email address, lets send her a present??

The Washington Post
Washington Post ombudsman: [e-mail]
202-334-7582

Post e-mail directory
The Washington Post
1150 15th St. NW
Washington, DC 20071

[Chimichurri]

19. done. but since she'll most certainly delete them without being read,

I've taken the liberty of also sending my concerns elsewhere.
Letters to the Editor
The Washington Post
1150 15 St. NW
Washington, DC 20071

and by e-mail at:
[e-mail]

Who would be above her head?

[EuroObserver]

74. It's a good idea to also fax LTTEs,

stating at top cc by email / cc by fax, as appropriate.

[0007]

190. Gottcha!

[leveymg]

171. Afraid the WaPo like the NYT have rotted like fish, head first.

The problem starts with the publishers and their Boards of Directors, and proceeds downward to the top managers who they have hired to do the hiring.

Here's the WaPo Board of Directors:http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=62487&p=irol-govHistDirectors

Directors


Donald E. Graham
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
Chairman, The Washington Post
Warren E. Buffett
Chairman of the Board, Berkshire Hathaway Inc.
Christopher C. Davis
Chairman, Davis Selected Advisers, LP
Barry Diller
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, IAC/InterActiveCorp
Chairman, Expedia, Inc.
John L. Dotson Jr.
Former President and Publisher, Akron Beacon-Journal
Melinda French Gates
Co-Founder, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
George J. Gillespie, III
Attorney, Special Counsel to Cravath, Swaine & Moore LLP
Ronald L. Olson
Attorney, Member of Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP
Alice M. Rivlin
Visiting Professor, Georgetown University
Senior Fellow, The Brookings Institution
Richard D. Simmons
Former President and Chief Operating Officer
The Washington Post Company
George W. Wilson
President, Concord (NH) Monitor

Committees of the Board of Directors

Audit Committee
Christopher C. Davis
Ronald L. Olson
Alice M. Rivlin
Richard D. Simmons
Compensation Committee
Barry Diller
John L. Dotson Jr.
George W. Wilson
Finance Committee
Donald E. Graham
Warren E. Buffett
Barry Diller
George J. Gillespie, III
Richard D. Simmons
Executive Committee
Donald E. Graham
Warren E. Buffett


HERE'S THE NYT (TimesCo):http://www.nytco.com/company-directors.html

Board Members

John F. Akers
Director
Brenda C. Barnes
Director
Raul E. Cesan
Director
Lynn G. Dolnick
Director
Michael Golden
Vice Chairman, The New York Times Company
Publisher, International Herald Tribune
William E. Kennard
Director
James M. Kilts
Director
David E. Liddle
Director
Ellen R. Marram
Director
Thomas Middelhoff
Director
Janet L. Robinson
President and Chief Executive Officer
Henry B. Schacht
Director
Arthur Sulzberger, Jr.
Chairman, The New York Times Company
Publisher, The New York Times
Cathy J. Sulzberger
Director
Doreen A. Toben
Director

[SammyBlue]

76. Left a strongly worded, yet polite message

What a bitch! I told her she would fit in at Newsmax, Faux and the Moonie Times.

[tavalon]

138. Here's my letter to her and her boss - sweet

Ms. Howell,

Just in case you didn't get a chance to read all of the comments about the lying and shilling you've been doing for the Bush administration in the Abramoff Republican bribary scandal, I wanted to give you a chance to read them again. Please read them at your leisure.

I've sent a copy to your boss.

Here they are:

<42 pages of comments, copied meticulously in their entirety for Ms. Howell, but cut out here>


And then the comments were cut off by the you, the ombudsman. Of course, these things don't go down the memory hole as easily as we would like these days, do they?

I'll be sending you another copy tomorrow. Feel free to send me a substantive reply as soon as you finish reading these. Barring that, place a retraction in your paper. Barring that, resign. There are many out there who could do your job with far more integrity than you have shown thusfar.


Sincerely,

[liberalhistorian]

170. Hell, a rat could do her

job with "more integrity than she's shown so far."

Now, how do I apply for her job? :evilgrin:

[fortyfeetunder]

162. I'd say forward this message string to her

That should send a message in her office!!!! Can't just cut off the blogworks, because we "DU" know how to find ya!!!

[myrna minx]

6. Gawd do I love DU!

:bounce: :bounce:

[robbedvoter]

7. I especially enjoyed the link for "The Lobying machine"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2006/01/18/GR2006011801026.html
A Lobbying Machine
Prominent Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff mounted a far-reaching campaign in 2002 on behalf of his clients, the Louisiana Coushatta tribe, to prevent another tribe, the Jena Band of Choctaws, from winning federal approval for a rival casino. As part of his efforts, Abramoff sent the Coushattas a list of politicians and organizations, titled "Coushatta Requests," for whom he wanted to tribe to write checks. Abramoff also worked with former Christian Coalition director Ralph Reed to whip up anti-gambling fervor in Louisiana. In the e-mail below, Abramoff tells his associate Michael Scanlon that Reed had recruited evangelical leader James Dobson to provide radio ads opposing any more casinos, and that Abramoff would send Reed money to pay for the ads.
more...

[creeksneakers2]

108. Where is the rest of the list?

If the Post has a list of donations that were solicited by Abramoff they should run it in its entirety.

[wordpix2]

112. yes, we want the LIST. Let's ask the post.com for the list & be very nice

about the request

[InsultComicDog]

151. Absolutely

...why are they censoring the news?

[Don Claybrook]

8. Isn't this the selfsame person Will Pitt told us about this morning?

Isn't she the one who will no longer answer queries from Media Matters?

She sounds like someone who needs to be summarily fired after the Post receives ten thousand phone calls, faxes, and emails. Uselesness in the service of evil--put it on her stationery.

[The Witch]

32. Yes, I recall that too! That's huge.

Buh-bye, Ms. H.

[ClintonTyree]

103. One in the same.........

she had no honor or integrity this morning as she has no honor or integrity tonight. This woman has no business overseeing the Washington Post if she can't control her own bias.

[InsultComicDog]

150. Yes

I read that too.

[texastoast]

9. Excellent

Shall we make a posterity PDF so they don't get vaporized?

[tavalon]

67. Good idea

[H2O Man]

10. Nice job! n/t

[wicket]

11. This is why I love DU!

:D

[DoYouEverWonder]

12. Cheers

:toast:

[jsamuel]

13. wow, thanks... They rip her apart for not giving ANY evidence but making

amazing statements...

[wordpix2]

114. yeah, I'd rip her, too, if I could (but now comments are turned off)

[jus_the_facts]

14. Wooo...they gave her what for...thanks for savin' that Skinner!!

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

:hi:

[The Witch]

15. WAY TO GO Skinner!!!

:yourock: x 99999999

[Oreo]

16. Here's there message about turning off the comments - Good Save!

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/washpostblog/2006/01/shutting_off_co.html

Comments Turned Off

As of 4:15pm ET today, we have shut off comments on this blog indefinitely.

At its inception, the purpose of this blog was to open a dialogue about this site, the events of the day, the journalism of The Washington Post Company and other related issues. Among the things that we knew would be part of that discussion would be the news and opinion coming from the pages of The Washington Post and washingtonpost.com. We knew a lot of that discussion would be critical in nature. And we were fine with that. Great journalism companies need feedback from readers to stay sharp.

But there are things that we said we would not allow, including personal attacks, the use of profanity and hate speech. Because a significant number of folks who have posted in this blog have refused to follow any of those relatively simple rules, we've decided not to allow comments for the time being. It's a shame that it's come to this. Transparency and reasoned debate are crucial parts of the Web culture, and it's a disappointment to us that we have not been able to maintain a civil conversation, especially about issues that people feel strongly (and differently) about.

We're not giving up on the concept of having a healthy public dialogue with our readers, but this experience shows that we need to think more carefully about how we do it. Any thoughtful feedback on that (or any other issue) is welcome, and you can send it to [e-mail].

Thanks,
Jim Brady
Executive Editor, washingtonpost.com

[Oreo]

21. GASP! I found the personal attack!

Ms. Howell's pants are on fire.

I can't blame them for shutting it down! :sarcasm:

Seriously.... all the comments are just demanding a retraction of their lies.

[katinmn]

28. Or maybe it was when one writer said she was "voted off the island"

:rofl:

[EuroObserver]

75. This may have done it: "Washington Post Company's shareholders"

"...scant coincidence that the Washington Post Company's shareholders are now suffering as a result of what has become an obvious prostituting of journalistic integrity once of such proud repute, with share prices having fallen sharply. I believe this fall in price is highly correlated with the purposeful intent to disseminate falsehoods. In order to avoid further loss, I have instructed my family's trust to end what has been a long and profitable relationship, and to take appropriate steps to eliminate our WPO holdings."

[Historic NY]

113. That had to leave a mark........n/t

[wordpix2]

116. wow, that's scathing, WPO did not like that one!

[leveymg]

172. "prostituting" - is that the profanity or the hate speech? eom

[Nickster]

33. How completely and utterly full of shit they are! They were completely

fair questions and they deserved an answer. Do we need any more proof that the WaPo is completely useless?

[joeunderdog]

61. so we should all swear in our responses when liberals are on the

hot seat? that'll certainly shut down any unneccesary criticism.:sarcasm:

I guess they don't have sophisticated computer technology that can delete inappropriate individual posts...like DU and the rest of the web.

[wordpix2]

119. another reason share prices going down--WPO's technology is old

or they're not using what they have. Not a good recommendation for a communications company.

Still, I have fondness for the Post, it's put out some good stories.

[Tuesday_Morning]

64. Here's my "thoughtful" feedback, Jim

I bet even your wife has told you that you cannot have a "healthy public dialogue" when one party is not being fair. This is not the public's fault. Their personal attacks rise out of your ombudsman's blatant disregard for the facts. Your house needs cleaning. And perhaps an ethics class.

[ClintonTyree]

105. Jim Brady defending a liar..........

how far the Post has fallen. That leaves the nation's capital without one honest newspaper. Shame on the Washington Post, shame!

[robbedvoter]

179. "We want dialogue - but only if you agree with us" Damn internets!

Curse you, Al Gore! We now have to know other opinions? "

[converted_democrat]

17. Bwahhhaahhhaahhaaa...n/t

[ChairmanAgnostic]

18. her own words from the time of hiring

My values simply are these: Journalism should be as accurate as human beings can make it and it should be enlightening, fair, honest and as transparent as possible. Mistakes should be acknowledged and quickly corrected. When you finish reading The Post, you should feel more informed than when you began.


Boy, that sure lasted long.

[myrna minx]

24. Just like rep Jean Schmidt claimed that she wouldn't mud sling

in her 1st Congressional speech. Yeah *THAT* didn't last long either. :eyes:

[EarlG]

31. Do you have the link to that at your fingertips?

I sense a Top 10 entry looming in Ms. Howell's future...

[dmr]

38. Here it is!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/24/AR2005102401130.html


- snip -
Another reason is that I care about readers -- all kinds of readers. I read at least three, and sometimes more, newspapers a day; I started reading newspapers as a kid and wish we had more young readers today. The Post is a fine newspaper, and this region is lucky to have newspaper owners willing to spend the money it takes in a tough economy to provide deep local, national and international coverage -- as well as to support an independent ombudsman.

But I wouldn't have taken this job if I thought The Post was perfect. A newspaper is either improving every day or falling behind. My mission, as I see it, is to encourage improvement and to deal with the needs of readers. I want to create a dialogue with readers and the Post newsroom. While I can't promise to resolve every reader's complaint or query, I promise to tackle in my weekly column the ones I find most frequent and significant.

- snip -

My values simply are these: Journalism should be as accurate as human beings can make it and it should be enlightening, fair, honest and as transparent as possible. Mistakes should be acknowledged and quickly corrected. When you finish reading The Post, you should feel more informed than when you began. I truly believe a democracy can't operate without a free press. But I also can't live without "Doonesbury" or "Opus" on Sunday.

more ...

[SoCalDem]

39. Found a link.. (may be the same as dmr's)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/24/AR2005102401130.html

[EarlG]

40. Much appreciated

;)

[ChairmanAgnostic]

42. sorry about the no link. I know how irritating that can be.

[wordpix2]

121. thanks, dmr! Howell needs to get some technology to control her problem

with freedom of speech. Seriously, if people were being disrespectful, just cut out their comments like DU does.

[understandinglife]

20. Well done, Skinner!!!

Peace.

[Skinner]

22. UPDATE: It was deliberate.

UPDATE: It apears that this was deliberate. Here's their most recent post: "Comments Turned Off - As of 4:15pm ET today, we have shut off comments on this blog indefinitely." Link

[dmr]

51. Newspaper ombudsman 'turns off' ombudsing w/ its readers

How professional!

It is apparent to me, her/their priority is finding a way to place blame upon the Democrats to perhaps dilute the Republican fraud machine.

Ms. Howell officially represents the Washington Post as a whole. In her capacity she has made a statement which prompted Post readers to point out her sloppy work.

I don't think she seeks a dialogue with readers and the Post newsroom.

I give her 5 Shameful Thumbs-downs.

[Steve A Play]

127. Further Update! 7pm: As you might expect, we're getting a ton of e-mail

UPDATE, 7pm: As you might expect, we're getting a ton of e-mail on this, and while I can't answer those e-mails individually, I'll address the two main points being made, that 1) we're afraid of being criticized and, 2) that were no personal attacks, profanity or hate speech in any of the comments.

On the first point, washingtonpost.com has done an awful lot to be as transparent as possible. We've started a ton of blogs, we've linked out to bloggers who are writing (often negatively) about Post content and we've made journalists from The Post and post.com available to answer questions online on a daily basis. So I find it hard to make a case that we're unwilling to be criticized. What we're not willing to do is allow the comments area to turn into a place where it's OK to unleash vicious, name-calling attacks on anyone, whether they are Post reporters, public figures or other commenters. And that's exactly what was happening. That leads into the second complaint. The reason that people were not routinely seeing the problematic posts I mentioned were that we were trying to remove them as fast as we could in order to preserve the reasoned arguments many others were making. We removed hundreds of these posts over the past few days, and it was becoming a significant burden on us to try and keep the comments area free of profanity and name-calling. So we eventually chose to turn off comments until we can come up with a better way to handle situations like this, where we have a significant amount of people who refuse to abide by the rules we set out.

By Jim Brady | January 19, 2006; 04:22 PM ET | Category: Content

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/washpostblog/2006/01/shutting_off_co.html

[InsultComicDog]

149. Yeah, I sent one

:kick:

For what it's worth, I let the Post know what I think of them... :evilgrin:

[AzDar]

23. Oh, fine work, Skinner..... n/t

[The Witch]

25. My favorite comment:

Dear Mrs. Howell:

Gilligan, the Skipper, The Professor and Mary Ann all voted you off the island.

Thurston Howell III says he wants a divorce.

Better start looking for a raft.


:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[SpiralHawk]

26. A wig wag salute of the Hawk wing, Skinner

Corporate media should serve the citizens of the USA, not the Elite Power Class BushCo culture of corruption.

[jsamuel]

27. my response to them turning off the blog

I understand. However, you must realize that when one of your reporters makes a statement like - “he directed his Indian tribal clients to make millions of dollars in campaign contributions to members of Congress from both parties” - and doesn’t source it, it is going to cause some serious feedback that no one would want on ABC Family. There is a level of professionalism that was absent from the information the reporter gave and that same absence of professionalism was reflected right back in the blogs. I suggest you find a way to resolve the non-sourcing issue with this reporter and post it on the website as well. I am sure that the blog respondents will be much more professional when your reporter’s comments are.

[The Witch]

30. Mine was:

We're not giving up on the concept of having a healthy public
dialogue with our readers, but this experience shows that we need to
think more carefully about how we do it.

How about backing up your reporting with a full explanation of the
facts instead of making misleading innuendos through deceptively
simplistic statements?

"A half-truth is a whole lie." --Yiddish proverb

Love,

The Witch from next door
(who still wants to work under Bill Walsh as a copy editor)

[qanda]

29. Wow!

And before they took it down, they had the nerve to say that they removed about dozen that were personal attacks. I certainly wish I had left my browser open with their comments about the deleted posts. It seems to me that they cannot handle the criticism that they so rightly deserve.

[wordpix2]

122. I think it's fair game to attack the reporter on a lack of professionalism

but it seems some of the writers know Ms. GOP Howell

[katinmn]

34. WaPo's big mistake is believing that all members of the public

are stupid and gullible and thinking they can use obfuscation to explain away their lapses in good journalistic procedures.

The NYT made the same wrong assumption.

We have been forced into becoming sophisticated news consumers. I thank them for that, at least.

[Rose Siding]

69. Yes! One comment after another from people who understood

It was gratifying to see all of them.

[wordpix2]

123. damn I MISSED it

[Triana]

35. I didn't read all responses but I saw no 'hate speech'...

...I did see numerous posts challenging her assertions though. Apparently, that's the problem. The propaganda wasn't readily swallowed by readers. How does that equate to "hate speech"?

Hmm....maybe there's more down the page - no time to read it all now but the ones I looked at were simply disagreements - many with facts provided to back them up. Guess WaPo can't handle that?

[InsultComicDog]

156. They are now claiming

...that the reason we didn't see the hate speech is that they were removing those posts quickly...

[kentuck]

36. All Indian tribes were "clients" of Abramoff ??

Therefore, the Democrats that took contributions from the tribes were connected to Abramoff as much as those that took the bribes directly? Nonsense! Democrats were taking contributions from some of these tribes before Abramoff ever came on the scene. The press is buying into the White House bullshit. Show us the direct Abramoff connection for any charges against the Democratic or Republican Congressmen.

[wordpix2]

124. also, show us how contributions to Dems are tied to votes in Congress

[Jo March]

37. I like this comment

"Ms. Howell hasn't quite yet mastered the art of 'truthiness' because the essence of that is avoiding the appearance of 'wronginess'. "

:thumbsup:

[wellstone dem]

191. that was my favorite too

"truthiness" truly is the word of the year.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

41. This appears to be the second batch of deleted comments

At least one of the posters complained about the deletion of a previous comment.

Think it's gettin' a little hot in the kitchen for Ms. Howell?

[dogday]

43. They are trying to shut down truth

That simple. They are purposely denying US citizens their right to the truth...

[EOTE]

44. LMAO!

I especially like this one:

"hey WP, this is getting embarrassing. seriously.

you need an ombudsman for your ombudsman."

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

45. 15 Minutes Into Reading - I've Yet To See Single Post Of Support

Going down that blog which was saved so wonderfully by Skinner, and I still haven't read a single one in favor of her position(s).

Guess they figured the only way to stem the tide was to shut the tap off completely. Gotta love this country of ours.<sarcasm>

[InsultComicDog]

155. There were one or two

...at least I remember one stuffed in there that was along the lines of "don't let the lefties get to you"... too lazy to look it up now.

[glitch]

46. Scooooorrrrre!

:applause:

[MissMarple]

47. Honey, if you can't take the heat stay out of the kitchen.

What a whining weenie batter. :eyes:

[Oreo]

48. Wow... she does look like Mrs. Howell

Deborah Howell


Mrs. Howell

[Scout1071]

73. That is excellent. Thanks for the hearty laugh! nt

[stevedeshazer]

117. Lovey!

Juuuuusst...sit right back and you'll hear a tale....

[Angry Girl]

49. Excellent job, Skinner!

:yourock:

[Warren DeMontague]

50. I think the REAL question here, is...

WHY does the WaPo have such a hard-on to convince everyone that this is a "2 Party Scandal"?

My message to them? SCREW YOU. You are an insult to true journalism. It's because of the Corporate Media's shilling for Bush and his criminal cronies that the constitution is in tatters and we're in the mess we're in. Assholes.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

93. Yeah the post started in with that shite right from the beginning.

[wordpix2]

126. self-delete

[welshTerrier2]

52. heh heh heh ...

nice to see you doing your bit to fight against the repression of free speech ... does ombudsman actually mean censor??? you would think a major newspaper would honor the First Amendment ... guess not ...

great job, Skinner ... talk about being in the right place at the right time ...

[Vinnie From Indy]

53. WOW!

I guess it was too painful for them to see so many people not drinking the kool aid.

[eyepaddle]

54. Wow, utterly great save, Thank you DU

Reading those comments was a joy (in an angry and bitter way) Ms Howell was getting sent to the woodshed, so they turned off the comments. Let's keep firing emails to the Post itself.

[Lexingtonian]

55. Great, Skinner!

What a bunch of losers and presstitutes on the WaPo editorial staff.

I guess the Alexandria party circuit Establishment is their most important constituency.

[hunter]

56. Question Skinner: It's one thing to close a thread to new comments...

...and another thing to delete the entire thing.

On DU itself some threads are deleted, and others are simply locked.

So, how does this relate to your own policies here on DU, Skinner?

I'm certain the Washington Post should have simply done their equivalent of a thread "lock" and not deleted anything. Then they could have written about that, and they'd have something to back up their claims of personal attacks, profanity, and hate speech.

In may ways "old media" like the Washington Post does not yet understand the internet. Their ivory tower has fallen down but they still practice the old religion.

[EuroObserver]

79. In this context, interesting to observe how Reuters,

which constantly updates breaking stories as more data comes in (sometimes changing them completely), does not delete older versions from their database (although will cease to link to them from the front pages). That's (internet) professional. Others directly re-edit, causing the original to disappear. That's unprofessional.

[Junkdrawer]

57. A newspaper once proved "The Cover-up is worse than the Crime"...

I wonder what ever happened to that paper? :eyes:

[InsultComicDog]

157. Same thing that happened to the reporter who worked for that paper

...became an insider whore.

[wryter2000]

58. ROFL!

Whatever you do, Debby, don't let on that you were shopping at Nordstrom instead of doing your job.

Posted by: Brownie |

:rofl:

[johnfunk]

59. Deborah Howell and Jim Brady: COWARDS, not journalists

The Washington Post continues its spiral into irrelevance with yet another gesture of contempt towards readers capable of critical thinking.

[jarab]

60. Great job, Skinner!

..O...

[marylanddem]

62. Thanks! How about that angry email from Karen Marriott

(presumably of the wealthy Marriott family) complaining that Howell's pathetic performances are losing money for Post stockholders and
that she, Karen, is directing the family trust to rid itself of Post stock. Sounds like a story in itself!

[wordpix2]

130. OMG, is THAT who sent that scathing letter to Howell?

""...scant coincidence that the Washington Post Company's shareholders are now suffering as a result of what has become an obvious prostituting of journalistic integrity once of such proud repute, with share prices having fallen sharply. I believe this fall in price is highly correlated with the purposeful intent to disseminate falsehoods. In order to avoid further loss, I have instructed my family's trust to end what has been a long and profitable relationship, and to take appropriate steps to eliminate our WPO holdings."

This is a Marriott? hahahahahahaha

[faithnotgreed]

189. wow - not just about losing $$ but disseminating "falsehoods"

with "purposeful intent"
thank you ms marriott

who knew

[Shakespeare]

63. They should be completely ashamed of themselves as a newspaper.

This is the paper that doggedly investigated Watergate. This is the paper that defended publication of the Pentagon Papers. Once upon a time, the Post was revered as an example of what all newspapers and the journalists who work for them should aspire to be. Once upon a time, I, as a reporter, would've given an appendage or major organ to be privileged to work for that great newspaper.

No more. That Washington Post is dead. Buried, apparently, along with the lovely Katherine Graham.

As of 4:15 p.m. ET today, I have shut off my respect for this newspaper indefinitely.

[wordpix2]

131. and don't forget WaPo is now a corporation and beholden to shareholders

not the public who reads it

[Kurovski]

65. Thank you for this fine public service!

Good goin'...hehehe.

Oh, and nice try, Debbie.

[tavalon]

66. I didn't get through all the comments yet

But unless they became personal and inflammatory later, the ombudsman turned off the comments because her assertions in her column were being torn apart. She was being shown as a liar and a rightwing shill and she didn't like it.

Time for the ombudsman to find a new job.

[tavalon]

68. I've saved this to my computer

And will send it to her and her bosses every day, because I'm a shit like that.

Thank you for your valuable service, Skinner, as always.

[Steve A Play]

70. Way too funny!

:rofl:

Deborah, what's all that fuss about up there? It took me forever to scroll down across it to get to this comment box. Good luck with that.

What I'm writing about is to ask you if you see Sally Quinn this afternoon, tell her to call me. It's urgent. We need to finish up planning our Spring Cotillion. Thanks. You're a dear. Kiss Kiss

Posted by: Fannie | Jan 19, 2006 3:18:36 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ms. Howell, don't let these lefties get you down. You're doing a great job keeping the Post fair and balanced. The truth is always in the middle somewhere, not on the left or the right, and that's the bottom line here. Your job is to find the truth, not to kow-tow to a bunch of pajama clad left-wing jihadists, no matter how many "facts" they throw at you

Posted by: DougJ | Jan 19, 2006 3:03:31 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Time for another blogger ethics panel

Posted by: | Jan 19, 2006 2:15:27 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ms. Howell,

Why don't you write a note saying you've heard not only from critical readers who think you're a bought-and-sold GOP conduit, but also from readers who think you're practicing responsible journalism.

You can say the proportions were about equal.

Just think: It'll be just like telling the Abramoff story all over again.

Posted by: LMAO | Jan 19, 2006 2:10:21 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hacktacular!

Posted by: Karin | Jan 19, 2006 12:52:38 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Steven P. :kick:

[EuroObserver]

83. "pajama clad left-wing jihadists"

Amazing :smoke:

[Beetwasher]

84. LOL! Well, They're Right About The Pajama Part

At least for me anyway, at this moment. You should see the awesome Homer Simpson PJ's I'm wearing right now. I have a feeling you'd be really jealous. Complete w/ Duff logos and everything. :smoke:

[EuroObserver]

96. Wearing a robe, myself (just out of the bath)

:hi:

[Steve A Play]

106. Ms. Howell is naked

and in need of a bath. Her journalism is looking a bit yellow. :)

[wordpix2]

139. just about to get my pj's on, LOL

[wordpix2]

133. this really IS funny!

[BlueEyedSon]

71. k/r

goddam fuckers

[greiner3]

72. Well at least for her, Deborah, she can at least look forward to;

A cushy job at one of the repub 'think tanks' around DC.

[depakid]

94. Pravda won't fire her

They have no more integrity than Fox- and conflict of interest doesn't matter to them. Howard Kurtz is still there after reporting on Arnold Schwartzenegger's campaign- even though Kurtz's wife was his press secretary!

[EFerrari]

77. Great catch, Skinner.

:rofl:

[Beetwasher]

78. HOLY FUCK!!!! That Is BRUTAL!!!!!! EVERY SINGLE COMMENT (Practically)

Destroys her. I mean totally DEMOLISHES her!!!!! WTF is the Post thinking? These are their fucking readers fro crying out loud. No wonder the Old Media is being discarded. AND HOW!

DU ROCKS!!! And so do YOU Skinner! KUDOS!!!!!!!!

[EFerrari]

80. I can hear her medical leave being granted

right about now. . . .

[Beetwasher]

82. Actually, I Think She's Doing Her Job EXACTLY The Way She's Supposed To

Meaning, exactly the way "they" want her to. Fuck the Old Media and good riddance. The veil is being lifted. I hope this shit leads to mass cancellations and thousands of phone calls and HARD letters. I know I'll be doing my part.

BTW, it was FANTASTIC to see so many people callin out the WP on this and calling her out on this and being SO INFORMED!!! That is GREAT news!!! It means the Old Media is becoming IRRELEVANT!

[EFerrari]

87. Hey, I got a response from the NYTs. The wall isn't completed yet.

And it sure is great to see informed readers calling b#llsh!t when that's what the paper serves up.

At what point does the corporate media just go to cartoons because literate folk can't take the pain of reading enriched propaganda?

:toast:

[Beetwasher]

88. I'm Reading Those Comments In UTTER AWE!!!

Seriously, I'm getting goose bumps. We REALLY DO HAVE THE NUMBERS!!! The support for the other side is a total sham. It's not even close. To have SO many informed people calling them on their bullshit is totally amazing. WE WILL WIN AND WE CAN THANK THE INTERNET (and Al Gore! ;-)) FOR THAT!!! :toast:

[wordpix2]

135. the difficulty is informing the rest of the country outside the Beltway

The Post was, still is in some instances, a great paper but much of the country doesn't have a great paper and doesn't read.

I teach and I know.

[NJCher]

182. they kicked her ass forwards, backwards and upside down

I read 'em, too, and was impressed with how detailed some of the posters were. Some of those posts took a long time to compose and a considerable amount of thinking and research as preparation.

I would be so thrilled if I could get my students to be such critical thinkers.

God forbid my students ever see the reward for critical thinking that this flack has extended.




Cher

[stevedeshazer]

81. Priceless. Thank you very much.

That made my day. :)

[anitar1]

90. Now if they would put Woodward on an indefinite leave--n/t

[ProSense]

85. This is one of the BEST post ever!

Actually catching the MSM in the act: trying to shape perception by distorting the facts and then destroying the evidence of a backlash.


:yourock: :applause: :woohoo:

[Adelante]

86. This is greatness

:toast: To DU!

[Kahuna]

89. I heart Democrats. They are tearing her a new one..

:woohoo:

[Ksec]

91. After reading the post and its comments..wow, just wow

This lady should be fired . That is if an Ombudsman can be fired. If not then WAPO should discredit her writings , in the front page of their newspaper. They are becoming the New York Times right in before our eyes.

And then they run and shut off the comments like cowards. Shame on the WashingtonPost

[benfranklin1776]

92. Gutless wonders. Pathetic wretched excuse for a newspaper.

They can't take the heat so they shut down the kitchen. This merely proves the criticism directed at this woefully overpaid and grievously underqualified ombudsman ("Heckuva Job Debbie!") was well founded and she had no rational response because the actions of the paper in being a shameless organ of the RNC and the adminstration were indefensible. They have been caught dead to rights. So in the best tradition of Pravda they merely shut down the dissidents who had the temerity to point out their deterioration from watchdog of democracy to loyal Bush lapdogs.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: to this website for carrying on the tradition of a free and independent press which the Washington Post has done everything in their power since 2000 to eradicate.

[Up2Late]

95. Good thing they shut it off, if you look at the speed that all those...

...comments came in, that could have crashed the Post's server. Looks like they were getting 4 to 10 comments per minute. That's barely enough time to read them before censoring them (deleting them).

[Burried News]

97. Great work - thank you - Woodward, Willfull, Krautyammer, Hogland and

HowIll - what a crew. Bon Voyage WaPo.
Stay the course ...

[ClintonTyree]

98. Gee, an unprincipled right-wing member of the "liberal media"....

go figure. :eyes:

This woman should tender her resignation immediately. If not, she should be fired immediately. She's supposed to be guarding against the exact thing she's promoting. Another member of the paid White House propaganda machine? You be the judge.

What a tool. :puke:

[intheflow]

99. Skinner, I don't know how you archived that page.

But God bless you for doing so! You are a true patriot! :patriot:

[Nothing Without Hope]

100. Remember this Wash Post graphic that slyly implied by placement of

Abramoff's photo, layout, and wording that Democrats got almost as much fom Abramoff as GOPs did? Published on Dec 12, I'm sure it's STILL being passed around as "proof" that Abramoff paid off Democrats. Clearly deliberately misleading, just like this "ombudsman.":

****************

[Tin Man]

101. Pretty work, Skinner - DU rocks!

[DRoseDARs]

102. This needs to be brought to KO's attention! nt

[mzmolly]

104. Go Skinner!

:toast:

[brentspeak]

107. Thanks for archiving that page

Deborah Howell's stupidity in perpetuity.

[spocko]

109. I created a place to comment on their blog

Now you have a place to comment on their blog.

"The posts that the POST doesn't want you to see!"

WaPoBlogComments.blogspot.com

Has been created! Have at it!

http://wapoblogcomments.blogspot.com/

Thanks to watou | 01.19.06 - 5:28 pm | # and Niles for their suggestions and support.
LLAP
Spocko

http://wapoblogcomments.blogspot.com/

[wordpix2]

110. delete

[wordpix2]

111. thread is a joy! Thanks, Skinner

[mom cat]

115. Damn nice fetch!

[mvd]

118. Thanks, Skinner!

:thumbsup:

[DinahMoeHum]

120. HA HA HA, TEE HEE HEE, They tried to make 'em disappear. . .

BUT NOW THEY'RE HERE FOR ALL TO SEE !!!

THANK YOU, SKINNER !!! I LOVE DU !!!

:evilgrin::evilgrin::evilgrin:

:yourock::yourock::yourock:

[AAARRRGGGHHH]

125. Best thread I've seen in a long, long time

:toast: :yourock:

[proud patriot]

128. Cool

thanks for saving that one Skinner

[KitchenWitch]

129. Thank you Skinner

:yourock:

[Sparkly]

132. "we're getting a ton of e-mail on this"

In case anybody missed the updated update... :thumbsup:

They claim they shut down comments because they couldn't keep up with deleting "vicious name-calling attacks."

"What we're not willing to do is allow the comments area to turn into a place where it's OK to unleash vicious, name-calling attacks on anyone, whether they are Post reporters, public figures or other commenters. And that's exactly what was happening. That leads into the second complaint. The reason that people were not routinely seeing the problematic posts I mentioned were that we were trying to remove them as fast as we could in order to preserve the reasoned arguments many others were making. We removed hundreds of these posts over the past few days, and it was becoming a significant burden on us to try and keep the comments area free of profanity and name-calling. So we eventually chose to turn off comments until we can come up with a better way to handle situations like this, where we have a significant amount of people who refuse to abide by the rules we set out."

(Which begs the question: Don't they have rules for their JOURNALISTS?!?)

Anyway, this doesn't explain why the "Deborah Howell Responds" page has ALL the comments scrubbed. Why didn't they leave the ones that DID follow rules, even if they felt they needed to shut off new posts?

[wordpix2]

136. yeah, I'm bummed I didn't see more comments. Ms. Howell, were all

the comments off limits? Doesn't seem likely.

[Sparkly]

140. The comments told the TRUTH to the newspaper.

There was a lot of factual information there that people deserve to read. How ironic that a newspaper, whose job it is to report facts, doesn't want their site used to do just that. There is NO reason for taking the comments down that had already passed their "politeness" standards.

[Gabi Hayes]

134. Sam Seder and Eschaton guy discussed this for a half hour tonight

I emailed them this thread and the capture of Post discussion

hope they talk about it again!

GREAT thread

[InsultComicDog]

158. Damn

I missed it

[Zambero]

137. Who "directed" Howell to put out these lies?

They're not even credible lies. Ms. Howell seems to be an ardent practitioner of the right-wing's standard fallback position of "saying so makes it so".

[Sparkly]

142. Yup -- it's one big echo chamber... nt

[bigwillq]

141. Good job, Skinner!

:hi: :bounce:

[tlsmith1963]

143. I Am So Sick of People Like Howell

I can't even read a newspaper or watch cable news without becoming completely disgusted by all the Bush sympathizers they seem to be hiring these days. And the media was supposed to be *liberal* before? If so, then liberals have been hiring all of these pro-Bush jerks! Let's call these liberal media people what they are: sellouts. And if there is anything I cannot stand, it's a sellout. When we finally get rid of Bush, I will remember all the so-called "liberals" who stabbed us in the back. I guess money matters to them more than their beliefs. Disgusting.

Tammy

[upi402]

144. "Hacktacular!" -was my fave

Effing media traitors and betrayers of democracy. Hey, have I said that before?

[linazelle]

160. Me too. Those people were GOOOOOD. nt

[Redstone]

145. Skinner, I salute you. Excellent work. We ever meet, the drinks are on me.

Redstone

[Generic Other]

146. Tomorrow's headline: Howell Causes WaPo Readers to Howl!

Check the classifieds too. "Wanted: Ombudsman who can avoid pissing off the last few readers we've managed not to drive away."

[NJCher]

183. more possibilities

Sob. Back of hand to head: ...unleash vicious, name-calling attacks on anyone, whether they are Post reporters, public figures or other commenters. And that's exactly what was happening.

:cry:

Debbie Does Malice.

Takes her ball and runs away.




Cher

[buddysmellgood]

147. You are amazing. This is significant. Thank you.

[marions ghost]

153. wow

:wow:--amazing number of intelligent comments directed to Ms. Howell, who chose to batten down and slink away to lick her wounds. This gives me hope -- these eloquent and forceful voices of the people are powerful.

Get the message MSM?? Your readers are intelligent and starving for truth and integrity in media. They are FED UP with your blatant pandering to the far right. I hope this WaPo case goes down as a textbook example of media distortion at its WORST! It is pathetic that our best papers have sunk to the National Enquirer level--the Enquirer is at least more honest in that everybody knows it's a fabrication. But WaPo purports to be actual journalism. Might as well merge with the Moonie Times.

I hope these guys get an avalanche of all kinds of mail in response to their arrogant putdown --which I interpret as, "Naughty readers broke the Rules, so we're forced to yank our fabulous Blog." (It's easy to image the middle fingers and the tongues sticking out as they run off).

In the bigger picture: Let us go forth and counter the Big Lie which has now been planted--that Dems are linked with Abramoff scams. If Dems were not too honest to do that, I'm hoping they were at least too smart...somebody in Washington needs to be left with enough credibility to clean this mess up.

[doublethink]

159. Now that was an awesome catch Skinner.

Let the truth be known. :toast:

[fortyfeetunder]

161. If Debbie can't take the heat,

--she should stay out of the blog room! What a wuss! :rofl:

[LynnTheDem]

163. Dear Debbie; You are LYING and you are WRONG. That's FACT.

Ain't it wonderful to see our "media" (still) lying to us (again).

[bling bling]

164. Thanks. That was worth staying up too late to read.

Something definitely smells at the Washington Post. I haven't trusted that newspaper for a while now and this event only underscores my skepticism. Howell has been exposed, and the WaPo is exposed for not demanding her resignation. They are doubly exposed for deleting all the reader comments and blaming their decision on the readership for their "personal attacks". I'm sure that's just an excuse, but even if that were true they could have simply left the ones that were already posted as none of those contained any personal attacks.

In any event it was heartening to see all the responses from readers calling them out.

[Sparkly]

165. Where are her recent columns?

One about New Year's Resolutions seems to be the most recent one on her page. Did they take them down, too?

[rumpel]

166. Amazing & speechless.

[Stockholm]

168. Excellent job Skinner

n/t

[DoctorMyEyes]

169. Has the WaPo ever "cherry picked" comments from here?

Great job snagging these, Skinner.

As I was reading along yesterday afternoon I didn't see any "hate speech" etc. Now I see the WaPo is claiming that we didn't see it because they were being so diligent in deleting it and it was taking up a lot of time.

What I'm wondering - cause I know I've seen it several times in the past, (I just can't remember who the writers were) is if someone from WaPo ever dipped into a DU thread to cherry pick some comments that could be construed as "offensive" in order to paint all of DU, and by extension all liberals, with a broad "whacky/hateful" brush?

I've seen it done with comments from here and from liberal blogs - usually taken out of context, and always ignoring that whatever "opinion" they're flogging was a minority opinion even on the thread it was picked from.


If someone from the Washington Post has done that in the past it seems a bit hypocritical to me.

On edit: This is a mild example of what I'm talking about:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48211-2004Nov13_2.html

[NJCher]

184. oh I'm sure

This isn't cherry-picking but it's a form of:

I wrote a post about Chandra Levy and her family background late one night.

The next day, the post was a story at the WP--changed around, not taken verbatim, but point by point, definitely based on my post.




Cher

[ChairmanAgnostic]

173. ANY RESPONSES, FOLKS?

I thought not. I e-mailed, phoned, but as I expected, nothing in return.

She must content with having a secretary delete all mails that might bother her comfortable ignorance.

[rucky]

174. "Howell-ie, you're doing a heckova job."

heckova job.

[lmarcotty]

175. Why is it not credible that they were receiving hate mail?

Thanks for saving the blog, Skinner - it was a comfort to read so many civil, well-reasoned responses to Howell's inaccuracies.

I do have a question for everyone, though. It appears to me, from what I read here on DU and on other websites, that the WaPo is guilty of slanting stories, selective editing, being gullible when it comes to WH propaganda, and all those things we accuse it of regularly - but in this instance, why doesn't anyone believe that they were receiving too much hate mail to deal with?

I don't find their stated reason for terminating that particular blog to be incredible - we've all seen how nasty people can be in what they write, and I don't think the right wing has a corner on wackos. Sure, they have MORE hate-filled wackos than the left does ;o) , but there are, unfortunately, people who are positively rabid on both sides of the fence (the crevasse?).

OTOH, they didn't state how many hatemails they were getting or what the percentage of hatemails to regular emails was - maybe they were getting a manageable number of nasties but used them as an excuse to end the discussion. I can't believe the number of unpublishable emails outweighed the publishable ones - I guess it's a question of how they were moderating and how much in the way of resources it required.

L-A

[PhilipDC]

177. Post Live Online

Washington Post Live Online--Noon Today:
Executive Editor Jim Brady will be online Friday, Jan. 20, at Noon ET to discuss his decision and user interactivity.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/01/20/DI2006012000566.html

Submit Your Question or Comment:

http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/content/submit_postie1.htm

[robbedvoter]

181. Thanks, here's my question

Do you think that the dialogue with the readers may include us bringing up pertinent facts that your articles omitted ? Is that an acceptable contribution to the dialogue, or it's "personal attack" as it implies the imperfection of your news reporting?

[emald]

176. wapo is sick with GOP cancer; bury them

once upon a time reporting was a means of learning the truth but todays reporters have words only for the money folks. Repeat their lies you whores. News organizations like the wapo have, in my mind, brought low this once great country. Trashy lies of the GOP repeated ad naseum, even under the guise of "ombudsperson". Between the lies on TV and those of the print we have a perfect storm of deception which is raining on our country. Feel good about that howell?

[autorank]

178. I'm going to frame this. This IS the true Washington Post

I write these "morans" a letter monthly just to remind them that they've ceased being a real news paper .

I dumped them when they started up on Clinton and devoted pages upon pages to a sex scandal while the world and nation had major events ongoing that were simply ignored.

They never respond, they never change. The graphic in the Post was misleading and RACIST.

Abramoff is the problem. Is there a problem with Indian tribes giving political contributions?

This came up in CA where the Gropenator accused Bustamonte of receiving funds from Indians!

WTF, this is what the Post is doing.

They are, btw, intellectually dishonest hence purging the criticisms.

This should be on the DC political bonds.

The ombudsman represents the paper against the readers. Now that's a new take.

[janx]

180. HOLD MEDIA ACCOUNTABLE --kick

[NoAmericanTaliban]

185. Deborah, you are doing a heck of a job

[Nikki Stone 1]

186. kicked and recommended (not that it needs it.)

..

[Lerkfish]

187. skinner, you need to send a copy to CNN

they were lying about the nature of the critical posts.
(someone probably already suggested this, but I don't have time right now to wade through all the posts.

great job, skinner!

[Oreo]

188. Their comment software broke on Tuesday... check out this post

I'm wondering if they're using their BS excuse so they can dump their comment app.

http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/washpostblog/2006/01/problems_with_c.html
Problems With Comment Publishing

Some of the comments posted to this blog's entries aren't appearing on the site. We're working with our blog software vendor to resolve the issue as quickly as possible.

The problem may be related to the large number of comments (more than 700 so far) received over the weekend concerning Deborah Howell's Sunday, Jan. 15 column on The Post's coverage of the Jack Abramoff story.

We may also have unintentionally caused or made the problem worse by trying to remove a few comments -- about a dozen -- that failed to make a substantive point and were simply personal attacks on Howell and others.

We apologize for the problem and will post updates here.

Hal Straus
washingtonpost.com Opinions Editor
By washingtonpost.com | January 17, 2006; 07:12 AM ET | Category: Reader

[Greyhound]

192. Thank you very much. After reading the WP "reason" for turning off

the comments, I read the original comments which, by and large, prove that the WP is simply lying. There were no personal attacks (plenty of attacks on her lack of professionalism though) and little that can be considered obscene, so it is obvious that they just don't want to have to deal with her corruption.

[MsMagnificent]

193. Yet another WaPo *disappearance*

a post by Stephen Bent states:

I want to know why Tom DeLay's name is "Whited Out" from the list you reference at (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2006/01/18/GR2006011801026.html) as"this online graphic" at the bottom of the list. If you are trying to get rid of this evidence, you will have to do a better job, including erasing the reference to DeLay's name in the right-hand column.

Well golly gee, surprise surprise! Trying to access that page one gets the message:

We are unable to locate the page you requested.
The page may have moved or may no longer be available

At the risk of sounding like a Klingon, when discussing the Republican Party, the sitting administration, and the MSM, the facty statement keeps recurring: They have no honor

May as well change the abbreviation from WaPo to *CYOA

*(Cover Your Ostrich Azz)