Our lunch with the governor did not produce much that was new. I suppose if we issued a joint communique, it would say we had "a frank and open exchange of views." He said a lot of stuff he’s said before, and we — mostly I — said a lot of things we’d said before.
One thing came back to mind, however, when reading this morning’s op-ed page — specifically, the piece by Charles Bierbauer that serves as a sort of apologetic for Newsweek. Personally, I’ve not felt compelled to comment on that. Newsweek screwed up, pure and simple, and people died as a result
of what a bunch of fanatics did with the dubious report.
But when we were talking to the governor about — what else — school choice, he asked something to the effect of whether I could think of a case in which competition did not have a salutary effect. I said yes, health care. And then, prompted by something colleague Cindi Scoppe said, I repeated a point I made in a column long ago — that competition can sometimes be very destructive of good practice in the news business.
And presto, Mr. Bierbauer today provides a perfect illustration of that. He mentions how Newsweek‘s Michael Isikoff got burned when he waited to get confirmation on the Monica Lewinsky story, and Matt Drudge scooped him by breaking it on his blog. Well, Mr. Isikoff wasn’t about to let that happen again — he went with the Quran-flushing item without waiting to go through the extra confirmation to make sure had it nailed. And people died. While some have halfheartedly stuck up for Newsweek by saying the story could be true — a pretty pathetic defense — it hasn’t checked out yet. (By the way, late Thursday, the Pentagon released this transcript of its briefing on the issue.)
Which leaves me with two points: Bloggers can be an extremely destructive force, not only on their own, but in terms of what they can egg the mainstream press into doing — if the mainstream press is not sufficiently grounded in its own values not to be sucked into a competition with people who don’t employ high professional standards.
What was my second point? Oh, yes — I am now a blogger. And I already see, as I acknowledge in the disclaimer at the top of my main page, that I can’t guarantee the same level of accuracy as I do my best to maintain in the newspaper. In fact, a reader pointed out a mistake just in the last 24 hours — I set out to list the 14 female members of the U.S. Senate, and only listed 13, which turned out to be an unlucky number in terms of my credibility. (I left out Barbara Mikulski, and I’ve gone back and fixed it now.)
These are humbling thoughts. I’m not even sure, from what I’ve seen, that bloggers are supposed to have humble thoughts, but I’m having them. This is going to be a tricky enterprise, with one foot in print and the other in the blogosphere. I’ll endeavor to do my best at both, but only time will tell how well I actually do.
Related Posts
It was very poor form by said “reader” (ME!) to point out the error in the comments. Comments should be for a discussion of dissenting or concurring opinions, not to point to minor errors in facts or typos. Blog etiquette demands that minor errors be corrected via email not pointed out in the comment section because the comments usually don’t make sense once the correction is made. As a “serial” commenter, I should know better.
(Like you, most bloggers get a lot of email so when pointing out a correction using a header like “Minor Correction” is suggested.)
Amnesty Int’l report on Git’mo today in The State (and Amnesty Int’l Press Conference on CSPAN late last night – I caught it cause I’m a new Dad) and Human Rights Watch report on US give a bit of context to Newsweek “non-item” heard ’round the world…
Brad,
Cindy and you seem to have a very limited understanding of the effects of competition. It is not a perfect process that works all the time in real time. However, over time, it tends to do a better job of creating the salutary effect the Gov. mentioned than monopolies. In the case of Newsweek’s reaction to the bloggers, Newsweek over reacted to the competitive pressure (a failing common to man) and has been hammered by the competition, forcing them to retract and apologize. The retraction and apology are the direct result of competitive pressure. Can you imagine that happening at the old Pravda? Your example, when followed to the end of the episode actually proves the Gov’s point.
Next, healthcare. Market forces will work there if given a chance. My wife and I have very high deductible polocies and HSA’s. That has made us better healthcare consumers. For instance, when we both were due colonoscopies, we compared charges for our respective physicians (both used the same facility) and found one to be dramatically less – guess who did them? Also, the advent of PPO’s, HMO’s etc. has helped contain the cost of health care as much as can be done under our current third-party system. Competition among drug companies, rehab centers, multi-specialty practices and the like have driven many improvements in products and services.
Oh, yes — I am now a blogger. And I already see, as I acknowledge in the disclaimer at the top of my main page, that I can’t guarantee the same level of accuracy as I do my best to maintain in the newspaper.
Really? Why can’t you? What’s stopping you from setting a higher standard for your own blog?
thank You.