Wash. Post ombudsman's won't respond to
critics
Media Matters
January 18, 2006
Summary: Washington Post ombudsman Deborah Howell has reportedly posted on
the Post's internal message board -- specifically mentioning a reply she made
to a Media Matters item, which she claimed "just brought another attack" --
"From now on, I don't reply."
Washington Post ombudsman Deborah Howell has reportedly posted a comment on
the Post's internal message board announcing that she has learned the following
"lesson" from exchanges with Media Matters for America: "From now on, I don't
reply." Howell's language did not make clear whether she meant that she would
no longer reply to any criticism, or only to that registered by Media
Matters.
Howell's post, as reported by the weblog fishbowlDC, came in response to a
series of Media Matters items (here and here) about Howell's defense of a
flawed Post article that repeated misleading Bush administration claims without
rebuttal. According to fishbowlDC, Howell made the following comment on the
Post's message board:
Omb Learns Lesson
Posted By: Deborah Howell
Date: 1/13/06 5:45:52 PM EDT
The omb lesson is that I replied to mediamatters.org last week that I
thought I had been misrepresented. That's just brought another attack. From now
on, I don't reply.
The "attack" to which Howell is apparently referring is a Media Matters item
in which we quoted Howell's January 10 email to us, at her request. Howell
claimed in that email that she had previously said that Post reporter Dafna
Linzer "was giving the administration's point of view" in her January 4
article. In fact, Howell had previously said that Linzer "was simply giving the
administration's point of view as well as others." But with regard to the claim
in question, Linzer had not provided the point of view of "others" in her
article -- an omission that constitutes the original basis of the entire
dispute. Because Howell's email contained this inaccurate claim -- and because
we do not share Howell's apparent belief that simply publishing misleading
claims without rebuttal serves readers' interests -- Media Matters noted the
flaws in Howell's argument. We leave it to readers to decide whether Howell's
characterization of the Media Matters item as an "attack" says more about the
item -- or about Howell's understanding of an ombudsman's role.
|