My letter to Washington Post re its story on Gluckert, aka Gannon

[s-cubed]

''I was quite disappointed by the sloppy reporting of the Jim Gluckert aka Jeff Gannon story. Had the reporter done some research, the report would have been quite different.
A few days after the Talon News website was opened, Gluckert received a prized White House press pass. Who authorized it? While anyone with regular access to the White House is supposed to be vetted by the Secret Service, apparently not so for Gluckert. Why not? Why a false name? Once he started filing "stories", they were often lifted word for word from the RNC's talking points, without attribution - hardly an example of unbiased reporting. Furthermore, some of the articles on his site, (not written by him), were fabricated, fear-inducing terrorist threat articles, which were then spread as "news". Is this reputable journalism? In addition, Gluckert is apparently yet another "journalist" paid to write propaganda. That Gluckert holds regressive conservative views is not the issue: being a propaganda shill is.
As for the more salacious aspects of the story, despite the denials, Gluckert has indeed written anti-gay articles, and even one trying to smear John Kerry as being gay. The hypocrisy of damning gays while evidently being gay himself, is the source of some of the outrage on the internet. As to whether he himself is gay, the widely available picture which HE published is certainly suggestive. Publishing it would allow your readers to draw their own conclusions. And, of course, if it is determined that he was profiting from male prostitution, the utter hypocrisy of dealing in sex while smearing others as being against family values deserves to be exposed.
In summary: Gluckert is apparently a hypocritical shill for the administration, with little or no journalist experience, who is called upon by name by Scott McClellan, to lob softball questions when real reporters are asking probing ones. I would think all journalists, whatever their media, not just on-line ones, would be exposing this man as an insult to and an assault on their profession."


Unfortunately, I forgot to mention the Plame affair, but there's enough there anyway. I continue to be amazed by the culpability of the MSM press. Oh well, the lapse re Plame won't matter: they won't publish it anyway.