Poo Flinging in Journalism*

Erik Wemple, former Editor in Chief of the Washington City Paper and current Washington Post media critic, has been chasing down allegations that Politico's Mike Allen selling favorable coverage on his daily Playbook newsletter:

Politico Chief White House Correspondent Mike Allen writes “Playbook,” a daily e-mail newsletter featuring stories from Politico and other outlets, various “exclusives,” tips and birthday notices. It also carries “messages” from big companies and trade associations hoping to reach “Playbook’s” audience of influentials.

All the items below were extracted from “Playbook” and are related to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a lobbying force that has advertised in the newsletter. Please designate which are paid advertisements for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and which are Allen’s own work:

………

Answers: 1) and 3) are paid ads; 2) and 4) are Allen’s own work.

One of the hottest issues in journalism today is “native” advertising, the tricks that publishers deploy to elide the domains of journalism and advertising. BuzzFeed has sustained gray-bearded criticism for its boundary-defying listicles. The Atlantic earlier this year ran a native ad from the Church of Scientology that inflamed its audience and prompted an apology and a review of Atlantic procedures for approving ads. Forbes, The Washington Post and the Huffington Post are also experimenting with this approach to funding journalism.

A review of “Playbook” archives shows that the special interests that pay for slots in the newsletter get adoring coverage elsewhere in the playing field of “Playbook.” The pattern is a bit difficult to suss out if you glance at “Playbook” each day for a shot of news and gossip. When searching for references to advertisers in “Playbook,” however, it is unmistakable. And its practitioner is expanding the franchise. Today, Allen disclosed in “Playbook” that he’ll be collaborating in the production of “Capital Playbook,” a newsletter stemming from Capital New York, the news site that Politico acquired earlier this year. Also today, the New York Times, as part of a reorganization of its Washington/political coverage, announced that it would be launching a “morning news tip sheet that sets up the Washington day for our readers.”

………

Such fandom helps to explain why Allen’s updates have become perhaps the Beltway’s most impressive journo-business story of the past decade. As previously reported, advertisers pay a good $35,000 for a weekly run in “Playbook,” a price tag that has inflated nicely for Politico in recent years.

And then there is the fawning coverage of Fox News, with the (buried at the end of the article) quote, "And yet former Fox News PR ace Brian Lewis told Jim Romenesko in 2012, “We do not have a do-not-deal-with-Politico policy. We deal with Mike Allen.” As they should."

So, Mike Allen is not happy with Erik Wemple, which is profoundly unsurprising.

What does surprise me though is that senior editors at The Washington Post and Politico have set up a meeting to resolve this:

Top editors at The Washington Post and Politico tried on Wednesday to mend a rift between the two news organizations.

Politico’s editor in chief, John Harris, and the Post’s editorial page editor Fred Hiatt spoke about columns by Erik Wemple, a media critic for The Post, that have been heavily critical of Mike Allen, a star reporter at Politico and author of the popular Playbook newsletter. Mr. Wemple has accused Mr. Allen of questionable journalistic practices, including using Playbook to provide favorable coverage to the companies that advertise in his newsletter.

It had been reported that editors at The Post and Politico would meet in person, but instead they talked over the phone.

“One of his writers made assertions that I believe do not meet Washington Post standards of fairness or accuracy,” Mr. Harris said in an email, describing the call with Mr. Hiatt. The assertions, he said are  “emphatically untrue — and we had a serious and non-dramatic conversation about this.”

Would the Post have a meeting like this with the now-indicted former Virginia Governor Bob McDonnel?

Of course not.  They would contact him for comments, and they would review any complaints, but a meeting?  Of course not.

When the target has a complaint, you get those complaints, and you examine those complaints, and if you determine them to be valid, you publish a correction.

You don't hold f%$#ing peace talks.

This sort of mutual back scratching by media institutions is one of the reasons that so many people don't trust the press.

^* Since I am mentioning Eric Wemple and journalistic poo flinging, I feel compelled to note that while Eric Wemple's was editor at Washington City Paper, he assigned reporters in an effort to out the identity of anonymous bloggers who commented on the oft bizarre conflict with the Wag Time Pet Spa, which was next door to his house, which actually involved the arrest of his wife on allegations of literally flinging of poo, of the canine variety. (see also here)