Fox Butterfield Effect Strikes WaPo Profile of Fox News Chief
Unless they're star names in their own right, I don't often name the journalists who write pieces for "liberal" news sites when I quote their work. They make the sausage that goes out under the NYT, WaPo, AP, Reuters and Atlantic banners, we as news consumers decide what -- if anything -- they've written seems truthful. Rinse and repeat the news cycle ad nauseam.
But this morning, I linked to the WaPo's Paul Farhi, and his effort to say "look, there's no news here" to the multiple reports of White House-MSM nepotism. As I mentioned, the WaPo is already off on the wrong foot in minimizing a story on White House/MSM conflicts of interest. As it happens, Farhi's name also appears atop this Drudge-linked item today titled "Roger Ailes wows conservatives in accepting Bradley prize."
The Butterfield Effect is strong in this one:
Turning serious, Ailes offered a spirited critique of multiculturalism:“We must stop waving our extended arms in an effort to balance ourselves as we tiptoe along the edges of the Constitution in an effort not to upset weak-kneed appeasers with our unflinching belief in the ideas that made our country different and, yes, great,” he said. “Are we losing America to the inevitable onrushing tide of history? No. But we’re in a storm, the mast is broken, the compass is off , and there’s a damn big hole in the boat. We have allowed ourselves to be manipulated by others, many of whom want to impose their culture and laws under the manufactured utopian idea that all all cultures are equal and most of them are better than America….America is a culture, it has a culture, and it must be recognized….We must not allow our collective memory to fade or morph into trendy revisionist versions of political correctness, which become a substitute for the truth.”
It wasn’t exactly clear who or what he was referring to, but the audience ate it up.
Yes, whatever could he be referring to? To answer the question might raise some of the more unsavory elements of what passes for "Progressivism" in the Post's collective worldview, so perhaps it's best to leave the topic unexplored, both for the journalist and his core audience.
In his conclusion, Farhi writes:
Ailes said that he intended to donate his prize money to a charity for senior citizens (he didn’t name the charity) and that he would match the money with his own contribution.
He also didn’t address a possibly awkward bit of business: Is it appropriate for a man running a news organization that promotes itself as “fair and balanced” to accept a large check from a partisan organization?
Related: Click hear for my March interview with Ailes biographer Zev Chafets.