So Richard Wolffe is now a bad guy.

[babylonsister]

I'm sorry to hear that.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/richard_wolffes_two_hats_msnbc_guest_host_and_corp.php?ref=fpa

Richard Wolffe's Two Hats: MSNBC Guest Host, And Corporate Spin-Meister

[madaboutharry]

1. I think this is an overreaction.

I have a good deal of respect for Richard Wolffe as a journalist and I have yet to see one incident where his day job at a PR firm and his role as an analyst on MSNBC has caused a conflict. One's job at a PR firm does not prevent them from having independent views.

I don't like knew jerk reactions, whether they come from republicans or progressives.

[havocmom]

Agree with you. All this rending of shirts and hair is nonsense

When one steps back and looks at the fact that all the MSM is owned by corporate giants which stand to benefit from slanted news coverage, Wolffe's connections are pretty damned tame, and he does a pretty fair job of analysis.

[Bluenorthwest]

2. I find it funny that you think being an MSNBC talking head

is somehow different from being a Corporate spin- meister. What is MSNBC, the Oracle, the Free Press? No, it is the GE Newsletter.

[vaberella]

3. Good to know that Rachel Maddow and Olbermann are corporate spin-meisters. n/t

[babylonsister]

5. I can find some truth and opinions there, vs. the corporate spin

constantly.

I find it funny you weighed in. Do you watch them, or just complain?

And what would be preferable to watch if I could?

[MADem]

4. He'd only be a bad guy if he did the job in secret.

Once upon a time Jack Murtha was a total hero here. Now he's like Dangerfied--no respect.

The theme song is "What have you done for me lately?"

[MarjorieG]

6. He has access and respected by the administration, so who first fingered and why.

I think criticism is off base with Wolffe, who is an astute analyst, witty, and hasn't said anything that would make me question.

[babylonsister]

7. Thanks. Good points.

It amazes me that the "L"/W, i.e., Greenwald, Sirota, TPM, etc., are vilifying him. Whazzup with that?

Here's Sirota:

MSNBC To Continue Allowing a Corporate Spokesman On Air as a "Political Analyst"

http://www.openleft.com/diary/14472/msnbc-to-continue-allowing-a-corporate-spokesman-on-air-as-a-political-analyst

[MarjorieG]

18. I do think jealousy is part of it. Pack mentality, but surprised with TPM, if he too,

Frankly, the web reporters can seem just as silly as MSM when wanting access, gravitas, and posturing pure. I'm older and appreciate EJ Dionne, Alter, etc., so that's my qualifier.

[babylonsister]

21. Thanks. It almost seems like when one talks, the others 'must' agree.

I don't buy it either. I also like my pundits, Dionne being one of them.

I also like Conason, Herzberg, a few guys. Women are harder to agree with! Gail Collins always brings a smile. Joan Walsh, digby, Marcia Wheeler. So maybe not!

[blondeatlast]

35. And Helen Thomas is affiliated with the American Enterprise Institute.

http://www.aeispeakers.com/Thomas-Helen.htm

Where's the DU outrage about that? I don't see that it has caused a conflict with her at all.

[Mass]

41. Not true. Read your own link at least!!!

American entertainment international!!!

[Lord Helmet]

8. I didn't get the memo. I like him.

[Cha]

9. I don't know..I saw his name on

DU for the last week or so and it didn't look good but I didn't really pay attention.

I guess the jury is still out?

<snip from your article>>

"As Greenwald also notes, Wolffe has already gone on the record questioning the idea that journalists should be expected not to act as corporate shills. Politico recently reported:


"The idea that journalists are somehow not engaged in corporate activities is not really in touch with what's going on. Every conversation with journalists is about business models and advertisers," said, recalling that, on the day after the 2008 election, Newsweek sent him to Detroit to deliver a speech to advertisers. "You tell me where the line is between business and journalism," he said.

Neither Wolffe nor an MSNBC spokesman immediately responded to our requests for comment. We'll update if they do."

[Becky72]

10. Glen Greenwald gets results

One less corporate hack pretending to be an unbiased analyst.

From the TPM article: But as Glenn Greenwald pointed out over the weekend in a typically hard-hitting post, that's the same Richard Wolffe who earlier this year signed on as a senior strategist with the corporate communications firm Public Strategies, advising several of the firm's top clients from its Washington D.C. office.

[babylonsister]

12. He does, but I'm not always so impressed. nt

[KittyWampus]

16. Greenwald is a crank.

[eleny]

11. I'm reading his book about the '08 campaign and find it even handed to pro Obama

I'm reserving judgment.

[Political Tiger]

13. Glenn Greenwald is so full of shit.

He completely blurs the line between fact and his biased opinion.

[babylonsister]

14. Thanks. I think he is at times, too. nt

[Becky72]

15. Obama reportedly disagrees with that characterization

Marc Ambinder, the well-connected-to-the-White-House blogger, said a few months ago:

whereas the White House does not give a scintilla of attention to its right-wing critics, it does read, and will read, everything Glenn Greenwald writes. Obama, according to an administration official, finds this outside pressure healthy and useful.

http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/05/the_rubicon_of_indefinite_detention.php

[babylonsister]

17. Excellent. I'm glad they read him. And I read Ambinder, though

after the primaries, I don't think he's had any input from the WH to break anything. He's making his educated guesses.

[Political Tiger]

19. Of course, if it appears on a blog it must be true.

Whatever happened to DIRECT quotes instead of what a third party's understanding of a issue is?

We have Marc Ambinder relying on "an administration official" who apparently doesn't have a name to relay what Obama reads and how he feels about what he reads.

Could Marc Ambinder be wrong? Maybe. Although I'm sure he is sincere in relaying what this "administration official" claims.

And what about this "administration official" who doesn't have a name? Why should we take this nameless person's word for it? Could this anonymous "administration official" just be making it up because this person with no name likes Glenn Greenwald and/or is a personal friend of Glenn Greenwald? Since this "administration official" is unknown to the world, I guess we'll never know.

Whatever happened to critical thinking?

Maybe the reason we are so poorly informed in this country is because we are willing to take what a blogger says an anonymous "administration official" says as fact with no questions asked?

[Becky72]

26. We also have Keith Olbermann praising Greenwald

For his takedown of Wolffe: "I honor Mr. Greenwald's insight into the coverage of GE/NewsCorp talks, and his reporting on Richard's other jobs. I must confess I was caught flat-footed."

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/8/3/761454/-Special-Comment:-Health-Care-Reform

[bullwinkle428]

27. Becky, some people just don't like to admit when they've been PWNED!

:toast:

[KittyWampus]

31. read between the lines of Olbermann's statement THE WHOLE STATEMENT. A few DU'ers are such tools

[spiritual_gunfighter]

38. You obviously didnt read the statement in reference

to Richard Wolfe or you are just dense. Olbermann states that he values Greenwald's reporting and he was caught "flatfooted", he says that "what appears to be truth is not what Wolfe told him about his non news job". He further states that although he feels that he gives insightful analysis he will not be appearing on Countdown".

What part of that statement didn't you understand? Olbermann himself knows that this is a conflict of interest and has distanced himself and his show from Wolfe. He values Greenwald's great reporting and you call him a hack. Funny shit.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

30. Reading between the lines

It seems that Olbermann doesn't want any part of this. His post on Kos bears that out. Why assume Wolfe is this great guy because he is "on our team". He is a corporate lobbyist and he was hosting a news show. What Greenwald reported was pointed and I for one was glad to have read it. I had no idea, I will continue to watch Olbermann but I will at least know that when Wolfe is on who he is serving.

[KittyWampus]

32. Oh please, Greenwald just wants attention.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

37. Yes

Greenwald wants attention!! How dare he expose the corporate interest in mainstream news, how dare he be one of the few voices in the media that calls out a corporate lobbyist when he hosts a popular cable news show and doesn't reveal his job as a corporate lobbyist. Greenwald is such a media whore!!! I am surprised he doesn't already have his own reality show where he follows around Richard Wolfe and asks him to be is BFF.

I know it is difficult when your paradigm has been shaken, just don't take it out of Glenn Greenwald. He has been legion in exposing the toxic relationship between corporations and the media. Just because you don't like the reporting, which you obviously dont, and you think Glenn Greenwald is being unfair to your pal Richard Wolfe doesn't make this story any less important. Sorry to break it to you.

Even Olbermann on Daily Kos admits that he was caught "flatfooted" on this. Are you going to malign him now as well?

[DevonRex]

42. And I think he's envious of Richard's popularity. nt

[solstice]

43. How does he blur the line? Examples, please.

Otherwise you're the one full of shit.

Greenwald is one of the few journalists who isn't afraid to expose whatever shit he finds, no matter whose it is.

[Hutzpa]

20. This is your typical hit piece

I guess it's Wolffes' turn how unfortunate.

[Engineer4Obama]

22. I'll wait till I hear him say something that sounds corproate spin meistery

till then he's got the benefit of the doubt on my part.

[noamnety]

24. I think the issue is not necessarily what he has or hasn't said

but that he didn't disclose his ties to his employer or public, which is poor journalism ethics.

[Jennicut]

51. I read about this a month ago, how could KO not know?

KO is trying to play dumb in my opinion.

[democracy1st]

23. I call bs I've yet to see him come out full steam ahead in support of corps

[democracy1st]

55. i fully apologize for my ignorance on the matter

[Are_grits_groceries]

25. I like Wolffe.

Maybe he has some hidden agenda, but I've never really detected one when he talks on Countdown. He has been pretty harsh in his understated way about some of the wingnuts.

His affliliations should have been clearer, but who knows what goes on in the backrooms at MSNBC. Maybe just his presence satisfies some people. I will wait for more info before I doom him. What he has said has been on target for the most part to me.

[Enrique]

28. he's not a "bad guy," he's a corporate PR strategist

it's not personal. Greenwald and TPM are doing an important thing here, imo.

[Mass]

29. I've never understood the attraction that Wolfe had on some people here.

He is just another within the Beltway guy (repeating the same gossips and the same conventional opinions), of the "gossip" type. They do not care about issues so much as they care about who is up or down.

This said, there are so many of them who serve two masters that it should be required they disclose their memberships and contracts when they have shows. It is an important information.

This said, as I have always disliked him, it does not affect me as much as it may affect others.

Going on Countdown does not make a good guy: see Dana Milbank!

[KittyWampus]

33. "attraction"? You mean appreciation? Can you really cite instances where DU'ers go ga-ga over Wolffe

Cause I check in on DU not infrequently and can't recall him ever getting any mention except in passing.

Oh, and what show did/does Wolffe have?

And you may recall, Krugman was also pilloried for same.

It's total bullshit.

[Mass]

34. All I was saying is I do not like him. Why should I? Is it mandatory?

For the rest, yes, I find ethical that these people reveal their links. To a point, I find Wolfe's link as a PR strategist less problematic than William Schneider's links to American Enterprise, but I do not see why he should not reveal them.

BTW, it is not about Wolfe being a bad guy. It is about GE not disclosing Wolfe's links. He could be the best guy in the world. That would not make it right.

[blondeatlast]

36. Hey, DU, guess who Helen Thomas is affiliated with? Take a breath--

it's the American Enterprise Institute

http://www.aeispeakers.com/Thomas-Helen.htm

I don't think it's made her any less objective or tough and I haven't seen a discernible slant in Wolffe, either.

[Mass]

40. American entertainment international!!! (not American Enterprise Institute)

http://www.aeispeakers.com/

[blondeatlast]

48. My, big, big BIG bad! Wow; thanks for setting me straight!

That's a big mistake--my apologies to Ms. Thomas and DUers.

[blondeatlast]

49. Thank you--as I say below, my big, big bad. My apologies to all. nt

[mrs_p]

39. i like him and haven't detected any bias in his reporting

(yet)

[solstice]

44. This is a huge conflict of interest. It is unethical and disturbing.

So yes, Wolffe is a bad guy.

Seems pretty obvious to me me and it's stunning that people trash Greenwald yet praise this shill.

[ErinBerin84]

45. I think

it's more the issue that Wolffe didn't disclose ties supposedly. I knew that he had some PR job now (and didn't work for Newsweek anymore), so I did think it was weird when they started introducing him as "MSNBC analyst" without disclosing the PR stuff...I didn't know the PR firm represented corporate clients. I kind of agree with Keith that i haven't detected any bias in his hosting/etc, but it may be more about the appearance of conflict, etc. That said, for a "beltway" type of reporter, I'll still take him over Millbank or Fineman.

[BlooInBloo]

46. Sounds like it's deserved, to me.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

47. I have always found him to be insightful --

and fair during his KO appearances. :shrug: I know Keith is looking into this and Wolffe is not appearing again until it is hashed out, but if Richard can keep his commentary honest, I don't know what the problem is so long as his PR tie is disclosed.

[Jennicut]

50. I have known this for a long time since his book on Obama came out.

I am not sure who to trust in the media anymore. :(

[noamnety]

52. A few people in this thread have stated

that they never heard anything out of his mouth that sounded excessively pro-corporate or like a conflict of interest.

The media inflicts their bias in two ways - what they report is one, and what they opt not to report is the other.

It's quite possible for a person to treat the material they report in a fair way that sounds unbiased, while withholding or not addressing damning information or topics.

[high density]

53. SNL predicted this of course

All that is needed now is for Olbermann to call him a Nazi and put a photoshopped image of him in a Nazi uniform on the Worst Person List.

[Gabi Hayes]

54. holy hannah....is everybody's memory that short? nobody remembers his cheerleading

for the Iraq war, or his loathing of inconvenient, impolite bloggers, or how he commiserated over this with Tony Snow and David Gregory?

well...here:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/02/21/wolffe/index.html

The "fantastic job" Newsweek's Richard Wolffe claims he is doing
(updated below)

At the National Press Club last night, White House spokesman Tony Snow sat down for a chat with what appeared to be some of his best friends -- our nation's elite "journalists" assigned to the White House -- and they all sat around amicably bemoaning how terribly unfair the criticism is that is directed at them by blogs (h/t Atrios). Apparently, one of the most pressing media problems in America is . . . that bloggers demand too much of the national journalists who are assigned to report on the activities and claims of the Government.

Special attention is warranted for the remarks last night of Newsweek's so-called "Senior White House Correspondent," Richard Wolffe. After Snow asserted that when you "open" a blog, "this wonderful, imaginative hateful stuff [] comes flying out" and that therefore "you probably shouldn't believe your opposition's blogs," he turned to Wolffe and asked: "what do you think, Richard?" Wolffe instinctively replied to Snow: "I totally agree."

Wolffe then proceeded to expound on Snow's attacks on bloggers by complaining that blogs are engaged in a "witch hunt" against the poor, besieged White House correspondents, which is terribly unfair because -- and, honestly, this is really an actual quote from Wolffe: "the press here does a fantastic job of adhering to journalistic standards and covering politics in general." Wolffe then adopted his most sneering and patronizing tone to observe with bewilderment that there are actually these "blogs duly devoted to media criticisms, which is itself kind of interesting given all the things you could comment on."

That is such a great point. Really, what kind of warped and obsessive American would devote themselves to such an unnecessary task as "media criticism," as though our elite national journalists -- who are doing such "a fantastic job of adhering to journalistic standards and covering politics in general" -- need anyone, let alone bloggers, telling them how to do their job.

...............

more here:

In a press roundtable at the National Press Club tonight, White House Press Secretary Tony Snow led a discussion with White House correspondents about the impact of the internet on their respective jobs. Their conclusion? They don’t like being challenged by blogs.

NBC News’ David Gregory bemoaned how political coverage has “become so polarized in this country…because it’s the internet and the blogs that have really used this White House press conferences to somehow support positions out in America, political views.” Tony Snow admitted he sometimes reads blogs (”I’ll occasionally punch it up”) only to find “wonderful, imaginative hateful stuff that comes flying out.”

Newsweek’s White House correspondent Richard Wolffe added, “ want us to play a role that isn’t really our role. Our role is to ask questions and get information. … It’s not a chance for the opposition to take on the government and grill them to a point where they throw their hands up and surrender.”

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/20/snow-reporters-blogs/

you have to watch it at the above link to get the full effect of just HOW nauseating the sycophancy. Wolffe is just interested in furthering his own career....that's IT

[Justitia]

56. I dunno, I like Wolffe. Don't like the ties mentioned, but liked him on Countdown. -eom