Excellent Vent from Michelle Malkin and co. on continuing efforts to hold The New Republic (and in particular, editor Franklin Foer) accountable for its endorsement of fabulism, and for its subsequent attempt to cover up its complicity. The piece features an extended interview with Weekly Standard online editor Mike Goldfarb.
Plus, Michelle puts on her Mike Wallace hat and hits the TNR reception desk.
Tip: next time, Michelle, wait for the weasely bastard to make his Frappucino run and ambush him just outside Starbucks. That’s what Mike would have done.
Or, if you’re feeling particularly ornery that day, maybe put on your Geraldo hat and challenge him to a carefully-staged fistfight.
And should the fight happen to spill over into a pit of Jell-O, or include a few white supremacists, I doubt you’d hear many complaints…
*****
update: Foer declines offer for on-camera interview. Which forces me to ask, does anyone have definitive proof that Foer even exists…?
If Foer didn’t exist, …. no, I can’t finish that thought. I’m not sure anyone would want to invent him.
Well, Jeff, we’ve never seen you in the same room together, so, you know, the burden of proof ain’t exactly ours.
ICYMI, here’s some blatant self-promotion via MM’s update:
Karl: I saw that! Congrats to you and Jeff!
I don’t think we’re ever going to gain any satisfaction from this one.
There are too many high-value things at stake here from a non-journalistic perspective for TNR to ever come out and admit that they were badly duped. To wit:
– The magazine is financially limping, at best. Circulation, page count, and ad pages are all headed the wrong direction, and steadily. CanWest, the new owners, don’t need any additional negatives (particularly a repeat of Shattered Glass) in what was essentially a difficult turnaround to begin with.
– TNR is undergoing a painful, public identity crisis. It has been shunned by the netroots as being too moderate, and so has lost much of the attention that it had during the 90s as a mainstay of a DLC-led Democratic Party. Negative press wouldn’t help this, particularly if they admitted their errors and the far left construed this as the magazine knuckling under to conservative pressure (I think we it’s clear they regard “facts” as a province of the right, while “truthiness” is their own competing standard).
– Frank Foer is a young guy, still trying to establish himself, new baby, etc., who clearly doesn’t want to see his career trashed. Furthermore, he lacks the ability to just blow this off through sheer arrogance as more senior members of the press might.
Given this, we are never going to see Foer or TNR admit the situation. Instead, they’ve taken the strategies one might expect: (1) stonewall, and (2) when pressed, punt and play to the netroots with some platitudes about right-wing wrecklessness and distractions from The Real Issue in Iraq.
At this point, both parties to the situation, STB and TNR have every reason to stay silent. Unless STB undergoes a reverse David Brock, they will remain so. If this continues to be ugly for TNR, all parties will simply wait a reasonable amount of time to provide the necessary appearance of propriety, after which Foer will end up “spending more time with his family” and CanWest will replace him.
I for one look forward to his Mary Mapes-esque “look what you people have done to me” memoir. Given his family’s collective fictional talents, it should at least be entertaining, and probably better than anything STB could write.
I imagine that the TNR is standing on its contention that the stories were backed up by his mates. They are resting on a he said/the Army said argument. Frankly, since Goldfarb has yet to produce his anonymous source and TNR hasn’t produced its anonymous sources, I think both sides have a point.
First, Carney, thanks for fixing Ianetta’s swing.
Second, Bob Owens interviewed an investigating officer. You can find that here.
The difference is Ms. Malkin would clean Foer’s clock in one take. Although I’ll admit Geraldo has a damn fine mustache.