Posted by
on Saturday, February 10, 2007 7:34:31 PM
As if we needed the WaPo telling us this? And Allah's got a great exit question for everyone:Did one online column irreparably damage Post national security journalism? No. But it does show that an online column rubs off on the newspaper. Opinions on Arkin vary among Post reporters who write about the military and national security. Some respect him; others think he harms The Post’s reputation…
Arkin apologized. He said he was “dead wrong” to use the word “mercenary,” that it “is an insult and pejorative, and it does not accurately describe the condition of the American soldier today. I sincerely apologize to anyone in the military who took my words literally.”…
An editor read his column before it was posted but didn’t see the problem. Jim Brady, washingtonpost.com’s executive editor, said that had he seen it, he would have asked for changes. Arkin said he would have made them.
Allah's exit question?
How is it that most bloggers manage to avoid comparing U.S. troops to guns for hire with no editorial oversight whatsoever, yet WaPo.com needs at least two editors to hold their guys back?
That's a great question from Allah, and I wish I had an answer. Maybe it's the fact that we, as bloggers, have to hold ourselves to higher standards lest we be savaged by our critics; thereby losing credibility in our reader's eyes. I honestly don't know if that's true, but it is how Marcie, Sabrina, and I operate here. It's how we've always operated.
But to have the WaPo come out now and talk about how they would have put a stop to it, and asked for changes had they seen it sends the wrong message to readers altogether. The point is that to avoid the Hell William Arkin delivered to their doorstep, maybe they should pay closer attention to who writes for them, regardless of the medium. If they can't handle that, then maybe it's time for a new group of editors at the WaPo.
Publius II