Everything You Need to Know About the WSJ Op-Ed pages
Yesterday, Gawker reported that Mark Penn is using his column to drum up business for his company, Burson-Marsteller.
Today, the WSJ stated that they don’t care and Penn can keep his column, because they have investigated thoroughly:
Today, WSJ spokesman Robert Christie explained the results of the paper’s thorough investigation like so:“Mark has assured us that through our conversations that he’s complied with his conflict of interest policy. He does not have any glamping clients nor did they target them before the column appeared.”
That’s right: The WSJ’s investigation consisted of calling Mark Penn and asking him, “Hey, did you comply with that conflict of interest policy?” The world-famous investigative skills of the WSJ in action, ladies and gentlemen.
I’m not sure what else you would expect from a paper that routinely lets serial liars like Betsy McCaughey and Karl Rove publish complete nonsense on a daily basis.
August 27, 2009 7:27 pm
Posted in: Assholes, Media
64 Comments
64 Responses
Zifnab - August 27, 2009 | 7:30 pm · Link
So, is Rupert Murdoch’s goal in life to find every source of semi-decent journalism on earth, infect it with his own special brand of whorish news AIDS, and watch it die?
Cause that’s how this whole thing is shaping up. When do we get boobies on page 6?
General Winfield Stuck - August 27, 2009 | 7:33 pm · Link
Well, it is the “Wall Street” journal. Anything less than profiteering every minute of the day would be un-American and maybe even be the S word devil..
As long as he’s not near the WH, I don’t care what he does.
Did we dodge a volley of bullets last November, or what?
Litlebritdifrnt - August 27, 2009 | 7:33 pm · Link
Halp! I am in the twilight zone!
ChrisS - August 27, 2009 | 7:38 pm · Link
I need to spend less time reading blogs and more time fly-fishing.
parksideq - August 27, 2009 | 7:39 pm · Link
OT, but speaking of Murdoch, a certain other News Corp(se) employee is really starting to come off the rails (via GOS). It may or may not have something to do with 46 companies ditching the ad slots on his show.
Serves him right for saying the president has a deep-seated hatred for half the country, up to and including his own mother.
El Cruzado - August 27, 2009 | 7:39 pm · Link
I dunno, that’s the kind of capitalism that the WSJ usually promotes anyway. At least they eat their own dog food…
Comrade Jake - August 27, 2009 | 7:43 pm · Link
You sure Lanny Davis is the worst Democrat alive Cole? Because I’m thinking Penn pretty much blows him right out of the water.
MattF - August 27, 2009 | 7:50 pm · Link
Note: the WSJ’s investigation revealed that Penn’s articles don’t conflict with his conflict-of-interest policies. “Gosh,” said Penn, “I looked at the articles I wrote and they don’t conflict with any of my interests.”
Chad N Freude - August 27, 2009 | 7:50 pm · Link
This is self-policing. Who understands their policy and can assess compliance better than they themselves? Self-policing, or maybe masturbethics.
Perry Como - August 27, 2009 | 7:50 pm · Link
Seriously?
“Mark has assured us he hasn’t done anything wrong according to his own rules. That’s good enough for us!”—WSJ Editors w/ Luv
Rosali - August 27, 2009 | 7:50 pm · Link
They’re missing the whole point and/or being intentionally deceptive.
“He doesn’t have any glamping clients” (not yet, but BM was trying to get them by using the article)
“nor did they target them BEFORE the column” (that’s right, the emails make it clear that BM was targetting then AFTER the column and using the column as a selling point).
The Grand Panjandrum - August 27, 2009 | 7:51 pm · Link
@Comrade Jake: Whores, yes. However, William Jefferson and Blago are still in the lead for worst Dems. I would think a convicted felon or someone who soon will be should probably move to the head of the line.
Tonal Crow - August 27, 2009 | 7:52 pm · Link
It’s the “self-regulation” thing.
Litlebritdifrnt - August 27, 2009 | 7:52 pm · Link
Test
arguingwithsignposts - August 27, 2009 | 7:53 pm · Link
Hey, their page 1 obit included this gem:
That’s right. The first republican the WSJ quotes is Rush Fucking Limbaugh. Mr. Kettle himself.
Oh, yeah. And there’s an op-ed from Lying Betsy McCaughey.
joes527 - August 27, 2009 | 7:53 pm · Link
@Chad N Freude:
FTW
lamh31 - August 27, 2009 | 7:54 pm · Link
I actually watched cable news yesterday and today, I haven’t actively watched in month. I watched for the Teddy Kennedy coverage, but the good respectful coverage didn’t last long, particlualry on CNN, who brought out David Frum who basically said that Kennedy’s death didn’t deserve healtcare as a “present”, as if anyone was dong that.
With that I’m back to my “boycott” (not really) of MSM.
El Cid - August 27, 2009 | 7:54 pm · Link
This would explain their newest investment column co-written by Bernie Madoff.
Demo Woman - August 27, 2009 | 7:57 pm · Link
WSJ oped page not being fair and balanced and your point is what? They were not before Mudoch and they won’t be after.
SiubhanDuinne - August 27, 2009 | 7:57 pm · Link
Am I the only person in North America who never saw or heard the word “glamping” before this article?
CrittersbyBritty - August 27, 2009 | 7:57 pm · Link
Did I get banned or something?
KG - August 27, 2009 | 7:58 pm · Link
“Ignore the little man behind the curtain!”
CrittersbyBritty - August 27, 2009 | 7:59 pm · Link
Okay I give up.
CrittersbyBritty - August 27, 2009 | 8:00 pm · Link
Okay that one at least showed. John why can’t I post? Did I do something bad?
Chad N Freude - August 27, 2009 | 8:00 pm · Link
@Demo Woman:
There has always been cognitive dissonance between their op-ed and their reportage.
The quotes above from the obituary, which should be “news”and not “op-ed”, are a serious breach of the firewall.
Chad N Freude - August 27, 2009 | 8:02 pm · Link
@SiubhanDuinne: No, but teh Googol takes less than a second to rectify teh ignurinse.
Litlebritdifrnt - August 27, 2009 | 8:02 pm · Link
This is bizarre.
KG - August 27, 2009 | 8:05 pm · Link
@arguingwithsignposts: I have a rule when it comes to recently deceased American politicians: I don’t speak ill of them. After some time, I might argue about the politics, but that’s about it. Mostly, I believe they belong to history, and while it’s sometimes interesting to ask, “what would [dead politician x] do?”, it’s really kind of irrelevant, since they are, in fact, dead. On a side note, that was one of the things that really annoyed me during the Republican primaries last year, everyone taking every opportunity to invoke Reagan twenty years after he was relevant.
These hyenas (and they exist on all sides) that decide it’s appropriate to attack the dead on a personal level before they are even in the ground are despicable.
SiubhanDuinne - August 27, 2009 | 8:06 pm · Link
O/T but Keith is going to take on Rep. Jenkins’ “Great White Hope” comment from the earlier thread sometime during Countdown. I got a sense during the opening tease that it may be a little more commentary than WPITW.
Rosali - August 27, 2009 | 8:06 pm · Link
I never saw the word “glamping” before but it was hate at first sight.
SiubhanDuinne - August 27, 2009 | 8:12 pm · Link
@Chad N Freude/8:02 pm
Thank you, Chad. I did actually look it up on The Googles before posting. I wasn’t asking for a definition, merely observing that I learned an interesting and unusual new (to me) word.
CrittersbyBritty(formerly Litlebritdifrnt) - August 27, 2009 | 8:12 pm · Link
I can has a post?
freelancer - August 27, 2009 | 8:14 pm · Link
@joes527:
I think we have a new tag for blog posts.
Litlebritdifrnt - August 27, 2009 | 8:14 pm · Link
My sincere apologies for all the drivel I have been posting. I simply cannot see my own posts for ages, it is like they do not exist. Weird.
Ouch Olbermann “great white hope – why don’t you just get a hood”
Ash Can - August 27, 2009 | 8:15 pm · Link
@SiubhanDuinne: Nope.
I was wondering why this sounded so familiar, and then it dawned on me. A few years ago, when Bottle Rocket was a pre-schooler, I’d hear clambering noises coming from the kitchen. I’d go in, and there he’d be, up on the counter reaching for the sweets on top of the refrigerator. His explanation? “I was just putting it back.”
Yep. Same shit, different kids.
Demo Woman - August 27, 2009 | 8:16 pm · Link
@Chad N Freude: I live in GA and when “friends” try to tout the WSJ or any oped page, I simply say, sorry I don’t read oped’s because they don’t include both sides. I then go on to say that I’m more of a facts person. Watching the reaction is fun.
Ash Can - August 27, 2009 | 8:19 pm · Link
@Litlebritdifrnt: Was that the first time you used your “CrittersbyBritty” handle? I bet that would have done it.
General Winfield Stuck - August 27, 2009 | 8:23 pm · Link
@CrittersbyBritty:
Nobody gets banned, except BoB, for a few days—- but the moderator gods take their bounty when they will.
Roger Moore - August 27, 2009 | 8:25 pm · Link
@KG:
I especially loved it when somebody started talking about how Reagan would be thinking about the future, not the past. I guess cognitive dissonance is a way of life for wingnuts.
Zach - August 27, 2009 | 8:28 pm · Link
I’m linking this thread to the funeral politicization thread through Mark Penn:
“Did the memorial service for Paul Wellstone cost Democrats the election?
A backlash against the politically charged service almost certainly helped Norm Coleman beat Walter Mondale for Wellstone’s Minnesota Senate seat. And a private poll by Bill Clinton’s former pollster, Mark Penn, suggests the service backfired on Democrats nationally as well.”
http://www.time.com/time/natio.....03,00.html
General Winfield Stuck - August 27, 2009 | 8:28 pm · Link
A few years ago, they tried to foist his mug on the 10 dollar bill, in place of Alex Hamilton. You gave the devious fuckers every minute of the day.
General Winfield Stuck - August 27, 2009 | 8:30 pm · Link
that should be /You have to watch the fuckers every minute of the day/
Someday edit function will return, and brain farts can be fixed.
Anne Laurie - August 27, 2009 | 8:34 pm · Link
Shorter WSJ: “What did you expect? It’s Chinatown, Jake.”
I am not a professional, but I grew up with an unmedicated manic-depressive, and that’s the vibe Glenn Beck has always given me. It’s not uncommon for bipolar individuals, like those with other neurochemistry issues, to “self-medicate” with alcohol—but the bipolar seem especially liable to assume that their addiction is not a side-effect but the cause of all their problems, and that as long as they’re not drinking, they’re okay. Looking at it from Beck’s perspective, he is being rewarded for alternating between screaming bouts of paranoia and weepy hissy-fits on his show… it would be counter-productive for him to dial it down now.
Chad N Freude - August 27, 2009 | 8:34 pm · Link
@SiubhanDuinne:
I didn’t mean to sound snarky and I hope you didn’t take it that way. I had to look it up, too. When I snark, it’s kind of hard to miss.
BTW, doesn’t the word “glamping” sound like an exotic sexual activity?
ed - August 27, 2009 | 8:36 pm · Link
He doesn’t have any glamping clients? How the glamp can he stay in business? For glamp’s sake, what the glamp are these people thinking. Glamp!
Shut the glamp up, Donny!
Chad N Freude - August 27, 2009 | 8:39 pm · Link
@ed:
Dude, that was glamping masterful!
Anne Laurie - August 27, 2009 | 8:47 pm · Link
@Chad N Freude: ‘Masterbethics’, for the win!
@Rosali:
Agreed. I thought it would turn out to be a ‘new’ strategy for media lampreys to clamp onto the latest hot glamor celebrity-trend. You know—Mark Penn’s entire career strategy.
@Zach:
Well, that seals it for me—break out the stemwinders, fellow Democrats, Mr. President, and give us the Kennedy Memorial HCR Bill! Because if Mark Penn thinks it’s a bad strategy to ‘politicize’ Teddy’s funeral, than our best hope is to go full-metal D E M O C R A T , since Penn’s record of 180-degree wrongness is second only to William Kristol’s.
SiubhanDuinne - August 27, 2009 | 9:04 pm · Link
@Chad N Freude/8:34 pm
Thanks, that was really nice of you. I did at first take it as mildly snarky and then massively upped the snark ante with my oversensitive and over-the-snarky-top reply. Apologies backatcha.
And yes, glamping sounds very kinky and painful, requiring lots of “specialized” equipment if you know what I mean.
Doctor Science - August 27, 2009 | 9:09 pm · Link
ed:
That was exactly what I thought “glamp” meant, too.
Maus - August 27, 2009 | 9:28 pm · Link
“So, is Rupert Murdoch’s goal in life to find every source of semi-decent journalism on earth, infect it with his own special brand of whorish news AIDS, and watch it die?”
Yes. Real journalism costs money. These people will infect it for rock-bottom prices.
2th&nayle - August 27, 2009 | 9:29 pm · Link
@Anne Laurie: “full-metal D E M O C R A T”
I like it! I’m stealin’ it!
tripletee - August 27, 2009 | 9:38 pm · Link
I go camping a lot. If I ever see a “glamper,” they’re getting one of my five-days-worn socks tied around their face.
I’m not surprised that steaming sack of suet Penn is promoting this, though. It reaffirms my opinion of his judgment after the trainwreck of a campaign he ran.
Warren Terra - August 27, 2009 | 9:40 pm · Link
I just enjoy remembering the time when Mark Penn polled (teenage?) boys about what they wanted to be when they grew up, found that a statistically significant – actually fairly large – group said they wanted to be snipers, and credulously reported this as being the coming career trend of the future.
If only he’d polled just a bit younger the coming career trend would have been “Spiderman” instead.
Everything I know about Penn’s pollreading skills I got from unfriendly reviews of his magnum opus Megatrends (yours for a dollar plus shipping, and doubtless overpriced even so), but certainly from those reviews he came across as a self-promoting innumerate blowhard dunce – and certainly his helmsmanship of the Clinton 2008 campaign conveyed precisely the same impression.
Warren Terra - August 27, 2009 | 9:42 pm · Link
Er, Megatrends s/b Microtrends. Apologies. Carry on.
(Ancient legends tell of a mystical, powerful beast known as the Edit Function, but modern scholars know these tales for the baseless myths they surely are).
SiubhanDuinne - August 27, 2009 | 9:56 pm · Link
Edit function?
Without compunction:
Extreme unction.
(SiubhanDuinne +2.5)
Chad N Freude - August 27, 2009 | 10:15 pm · Link
@SiubhanDuinne:
“Mildly” and “snarky” do not coexist in my self-expression model. If something I write seems mildly snarky, It’s just a failed attempt at humor.
Svensker - August 27, 2009 | 10:27 pm · Link
@SiubhanDuinne:
No.
Mike G - August 27, 2009 | 10:28 pm · Link
...a paper that routinely lets serial liars like Betsy McCaughey and Karl Rove publish complete nonsense on a daily basis.
It’s not about truth or accuracy, it’s about pushing a storyline that suits the political and economic interests of their owners and advertisers. I understand why people making seven figures love a self-enclosed fantasy world that revolves around them. What I can’t comprehend is the authoritarian followers out in white-trash-Repigworld so desperate for a strong-daddy to tell them how to think, who eagerly buy into a worldview in which their role is somewhere between feudal serf and chum-in-a-shark-tank.
Warren Terra - August 27, 2009 | 10:36 pm · Link
I don’t know that I’ve noticed anything from him on the subject since the Murdoch takeover, which has been predicted to erode both the quality of the Wall Street Journal’s news section and the separation of its news and opinion sections, but Eric Alterman, who has a sustained professional interest in right-wing media bias and professional standards, has repeatedly written about the sterling quality of the Journal’s news pages and the sheer unhinged lunacy and unconscionable dishonesty of the Journal’s Op-Ed pages.
Left Coast Tom - August 27, 2009 | 10:49 pm · Link
The Wall Street Fishwrap as quoted by John quoting gawker:
Can someone tell me what “glamping” means in this context? I just consulted Mr. Google and he told me, in every first-page link, that it means “glamorous camping”. One look at Mark Penn tells me that neither the “gl” or the “amping” part of this can be correct.
Chad N Freude - August 27, 2009 | 10:52 pm · Link
@Warren Terra:
True. (I agreed with this @Chad N Freude). But the Kennedy obit is causing me to rethink this. BTW, “unhinged lunacy” is to WSJ op-ed as “dust mote” is to asteroid. And yes, the self-reference here does indicate that I am an attention
whoresex worker.Chad N Freude - August 27, 2009 | 10:57 pm · Link
@Left Coast Tom:
Silly! “Glamping”refers to Mr. Penn’s clients. Mr. Penn would not recognize either glamor or camp if the Village People surrounded him on the street. (The original VP, not the current “Villagers”.)
Left Coast Tom - August 27, 2009 | 11:06 pm · Link
@Chad N Freude:
Oh my God, I finally followed the link (Tom +4). They’re serious…he’s looking for “glamorous camping” clients. No wonder he hasn’t found any.
Paul in KY - August 28, 2009 | 3:08 pm · Link
I don’t understand the context the word ‘glamping’ was used in the WSJ excerpt. Urban dictionary defined it as ‘glamorous camping’. Why would his potential clients be ‘glamorous campers’?
I’d say you’d have to be pretty camp and/or dense to employ him. IMO, he’s too ugly for the ‘camp’ faction.