There’s word that Dave Weigel has resigned from the Washington Post.
I’ve known Dave Weigel since he was an intern at USA Today; he used to send me e-mails to the Kerry Spot on how I might be overestimating Bush’s chances.
The last time there was a big brouhaha about Weigel, it seemed that everybody noted that they liked him personally, and then tore into what he wrote.
I’m sure there are readers out there exclaiming, “so what if he’s a nice guy when you run into him?” but it’s worth noting that there are a lot of folks in this world whose political views somehow drive them to uncontrollable, overt nastiness or hostility toward those with different views. The world probably could use more of Dave’s trait of being personally amiable with those with whom he disagrees.
At least to their faces; his comments on Journo-List are nasty stuff. (If, in the coming hours, the Daily Caller spotlights a Weigel-written “Jim Geraghty is a big doofus” comment, disregard anything nice I write about him below.)
Then again, let he who is without sin — let’s say, a particular sin like wrath — cast the first stone. Getting angry and expressing a desire that somebody else engage in an anatomically difficult act of self-procreation is, I suspect, very human and common in the world of journalism. Writing it down in a venue where it is saved forever is probably not wise; doing so for long stretches of time is probably not healthy.
From time to time Dave and I chat, and sometimes I would worry that he got a little too worked up about reactions to what he wrote. We’re in the news business, where the lifespan of articles, events, scandals, and comments grows ever shorter. In 48 hours we’ll be all focused on something else, for better or worse. Life is too short to worry about most of this stuff.
Did Dave deserve to be dismissed from the Post? I suspect he feared that in the eyes of many conservatives, he would always be associated with his furious, sneering Journo-List comments and never be able to effectively cover them again.
With the clearly established liberal Ezra Klein — you know, the guy who Tweeted a joke about the sodomization of Tim Russert and who contended I moved to Turkey for two years out of boredom — writing a blog about domestic policy for the Post, many conservatives figured the Post would eventually establish a right-of-center equivalent, which Dave is not. Dave only fits the loosest definition of conservative; I think he’s best defined as a left-leaning, idiosyncratic libertarian. He is also a political junkie with a voluminous appetite for news and a dogged reporter. From where I sit, he spends too much time writing about fringe figures and trends that are largely irrelevant to national politics (Orly Taitz, Birthers, etc.), but perhaps that’s his genuine fascination and/or what his employers wanted. Righties suspected Dave wanted to spotlight the freakiest and least appealing self-proclaimed “conservatives”; I suspect that at least part of Dave’s mentality was simply, “You have got to hear what this lunatic is saying.”
Dave’s quandaries probably required nothing more than a bit of anger management and a more precise label of his beat — “A look at the weirder side of American politics” or what have you. Journo-List is, I’d contend, a more problematic aspect of this whole mess.
I suppose it’s possible that Journo-List really was set up to be a place to connect reporters and policy wonks, as Ezra Klein contends. Those of us on the outside can’t help but wonder if it’s how liberal bloggers and major left-of-center voices in the mainstream media work out their message coordination and sort out their differences away from the eyes of the public.
I’m on a conservative mailing list called Rightblogs, and from what I have seen, it succeeds at hiding conservative disagreements about as effectively as BP controls oil spills. If Rightblogs was set up to ensure that conservatives settled differences among themselves away from the eyes of the public, I think we can declare it an epic catastrophic failure on par with picking Ryan Leaf with the second overall pick in the NFL draft. Of course, I think it was just set up as a way for conservative bloggers to talk to each other; the vast majority of messages seem to be variations of, “Hey, look what I wrote!”
Somebody on Journo-List didn’t like Dave Weigel and decided to publish his most furious and incendiary remarks that he thought — unwisely — that he was expressing in confidence. (At least I hope these were his most furious and incendiary remarks; what could top these? “I’m going to deafen David Brooks with a vuvuzela”?) So what else is on there that, if revealed, could make life difficult for Ezra Klein or Jeffrey Toobin or Paul Krugman or Ben Smith or Mike Allen? Or is the idea that as long as they stay in line, they’ll never have some remark they regret publicized to the world? Did Journo-List evolve into a massive blackmail scheme that ensures no one inside the club will ever speak ill of another member?
Jim, I applaud the urge to be nice, but I think it's misplaced. We're talking about a guy who was hired for a specific purpose...reporting on conservatives. To discover comments about the disregard in which he held the objects of his reporting, to the degree that he wished painful death upon someone (Rush Limbaugh) would make me rethink any kind of relationship I had with him, however nice he may be.
Put another way, how nice was he to the people on whom he was reporting before he mocked them (however thinly veiled) in his posts?
He was paid to be a shill. He was outed as a shill. That destroyed his ability to be a shill and the WaPo had no further use for him.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSounds like Journo-List is borrowing tactics from Scientology...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI have never read any of his blogs, just the stuff DC quoted, so it is hard to understand the rallying around the guy. But DC is a clubby place and I guess it just re-enforces that for those of us who don't run in those circles.
Sure everyone has probably muttered an immature word, but I doubt I'd ever read similar comments from, say, Mickey Kaus, along these lines.
Did he deserve to go? I couldn't say, I wasn't a reader and it wouldn't make a difference to me either way. I also don't really expect much out of pundits when it comes to things like this. I guess the one thing I will say for him is that, unlike many pundits, he apparently had a few honestly held beliefs (even if they were not honestly communicated).
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRyan Leaf? Really? You couldn't have gone with, say, JaMarcus Russell?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOK, look at an analogy. Suppose the Boston Globe hired a beat reporter for the Red Sox who was actually a rabid Yankees fan. His public posts on the website always seemed to highlight the worst aspects of the players. He actively sought to create dissension between the players by publishing and highlighting insider info. Then, lo and behold, someone reveals that he is actually a charter member of a Yankees fan list and posts wicked foul-mouthed posts about the Red Sox there.
I think that all would agree that he was not serving his employer well, and had permanently poisoned his future ability to get stories from the players. No one would bat an eye at his firing.
So why is this any different?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI imagine that journalists covering national politics have this "expat" thing going on in their dealings with each other, particularly in DC. Regardless of ideology, they like to think that they connect with each other on a "smoky bar in Saigon" level that is incomprehensible to their readers. Particularly on the Right where readers see that the Leftward writers take their ideology much more seriously than any relationship with a Right-side writer. I think that chalking up Weigel's Journolist rantings to anger alone is wishful thinking.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Dave’s quandaries probably required nothing more than a bit of anger management and a more precise label of his beat — “A look at the weirder side of American politics” or what have you."
That is a terrific idea, if DW really wants to reclaim a bit of centrist credibility rather than just becoming another liberal columnist/blogger. He would have to highlight the oddballs from all corners of the political spectrum. How about "Politics as Unusual" by Dave Weigel?
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"there are a lot of folks in this world whose political views somehow drive them to uncontrollable, overt nastiness or hostility toward those with different views."
Yeah, but those people only get to host a sports show on HBO.
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"I suspect he feared that in the eyes of many conservatives, he would always be associated with his furious, sneering Journo-List comments and never be able to effectively cover them again."
Gee, Jim, ya think?
What would really serve not only conservative journos, any others on the left would be a quick perusal of Alexandr Solzhenitsyn's comments about the media in his "A World Split Apart" speech.
Innuendo and gossip posing as fact are a slippery slope and Weigel and company took those risks.
What Weigel and Klein have only proved is that epistemic closure is not just a problem for the right. The latter should be intimately familiar with the concept, as he gleefully trotted out this theory and proceeded to plaster the right with it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseCan the Republic survive without Dave Weigel covering conservatives for the Washington Post? I must confess I worry it will not.
He was a rare specimen....his ability to fairly cover conservatives while privately (and not so privately) wishing horrific acts of violence and death on conservatives has never been matched by any journalist covering conservatives and politics in general.
Weigel's blog posts on conservatives never failed to inspire, to illuminate the mind, to inform, to instruct, to make us laugh. Dave Weigel is the model of good journalism, and those few wingnuts out there that scoff at this assertion need to open their mind. Dave Weigel, despite his desire to burn Matt Drudge at the stake for linking to his blog posts, is maybe the most decent man to every walk this earth. Conservatives owe this man a debt we can never repay him.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI think this whole Dave Weigel – Journolist incident has been very illuminating. It was obvious to anyone with any sense at all that Dave Weigel was a juvenile, foul-mouth, petty leftist with a chip on his shoulder and an agenda to discredit all things conservative. It took me 2 columns and a review of a day of his tweets. None of this mattered to his conservative pundit "friends"; those who care more for the Beltway clique and cocktail party invitations than for principles like liberty and free enterprise. These "friends" of Dave Weigel continued to feed him material because he fed their egos, while he continued to trash them behind their backs to his cooler friends.
Little by little, the small people learn exactly who they can and cannot trust in what may be the most important battle of their lives.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse