Wash Post Fires Froomkin

[jsteele]

Unfortunately, since I can't cancel my Washington Post subscription due to having already cancelled it, I have a limited ability to protest today's firing by the Post of Dan Froomkin. The same paper that recently hired Bill Kristol has gotten rid of one of the few authentic left-wing voices at the paper (or at least at the website since he didn't appear in print). I think we can finally put to bed the old canard of the Post being Pravda on the Potomac. It's more like the Weekly Standard on the Potomac.

Froomkin wrote two out of the ten most-trafficked columns on the Post website last year. The idiots who are trying to increase traffic on their website just fired one of the main attractions. Does anyone wonder why newspapers are dying? The Post has plenty of room for right-wingers and one of the "liberal" spots is taken up by asshat Richard Cohen. I can catch Eugene Robinson on MSNBC, so really no need for the Post anymore.

I don't know if Froomkin visits this website, but at one time he was a DCUM mailing list subscriber. If so, good luck Dan. I'll be reading you wherever you land.

[Anonymous]

I read my Post in print so I'm not familiar with Froomkin but it is so true that the op-ed page is loaded with conservative writers these days.

[Anonymous]

I like Froomkin, too, and was surprised they let him go. Incidentally, I read today that his readership was down once Obama was elected. Many people, so they said, read to see his critiques of the Bush White House and when that was gone so were the viewers. Don't know how true that is . . .

The "liberal" Post myth is just that, imo. Gerson, Parker, Krauthammer, Kristol . . . hardly and adverstisment for the dems.

[Anonymous]

Not to worry, Jeff and others! I'm sure Froomkin's anti-American, anti-Israel rhetoric will find a new home soon!

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Not to worry, Jeff and others! I'm sure Froomkin's anti-American, anti-Israel rhetoric will find a new home soon!

Just like when you said my views on Israel made you ill, yet could not provide an example of an illness-inducing view, you probably can't back up your allegations about Froomkin's views either? But, just for giggles I'll ask anyway. Could you provide an example of Froomkin being anti-American or anti-Israeli?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I like Froomkin, too, and was surprised they let him go. Incidentally, I read today that his readership was down once Obama was elected. Many people, so they said, read to see his critiques of the Bush White House and when that was gone so were the viewers. Don't know how true that is . . .

The "liberal" Post myth is just that, imo. Gerson, Parker, Krauthammer, Kristol . . . hardly and adverstisment for the dems.

The Post's columnists might trend center-right, but its regular coverage can hardly be called conservative.

[Anonymous]

Their main criterion for printing something is that it is crap. Clearly Froomkin didn't meet this criterion. Happily, Wolfowitz, Kristol et al can reliably turn out excrement.

I never find anything worth reading in the Post, either online or in print.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not to worry, Jeff and others! I'm sure Froomkin's anti-American, anti-Israel rhetoric will find a new home soon!

The anti-Israel thing always gets me. Israelis don't talk that way. Just American supporters of Israel. It's fascinating, really, that you can have meaningful dialogue with Israelis, but try the same thing over here and you get accused of treason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like Froomkin, too, and was surprised they let him go. Incidentally, I read today that his readership was down once Obama was elected. Many people, so they said, read to see his critiques of the Bush White House and when that was gone so were the viewers. Don't know how true that is . . .

The "liberal" Post myth is just that, imo. Gerson, Parker, Krauthammer, Kristol . . . hardly and adverstisment for the dems.

The Post's columnists might trend center-right, but its regular coverage can hardly be called conservative.

Ditto. You would have to be seriously out of touch with reality to think its regular coverage is 'conservative'. I am not sure I can agree that columnists trend center right. There are just diff points of view--as in the Times columns. That's called diversity by the way.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:That's called diversity by the way.

That's exactly my issue with the Post. There is very little diversity on the Op-Ed page. There are neoconservatives who trend right and neoconservatives who trend left, but little else. I can appreciate a Will or a Gerson (I've no time for Krauthammer, however), but where are the true liberals?

[Anonymous]

Hey Jeff, have you seen Glenn Greenwald's Salon article http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/07/07/froomkin/index.html:

"In yet another sign of how online media outlets are strengthening as their older establishment predecessors are struggling to survive, The Huffington Post has hired Dan Froomkin to be its Washington Bureau Chief and regular columnist/blogger."

I guess this un-Wash-ed columnist went off in a Huff.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:I guess this un-Wash-ed columnist went off in a Huff.

Good one. The "Unknown Punster" strikes again.

Yes, I saw Greenwald's article. I'm not sure that the Huff Post is the best place for Froomkin, but it's better than nothing. I can't wait to see what Froomkin has to say about the Post's pay for play scandal.

[Anonymous]

Interesting read for those interested in this topic:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/13/business/media/13froomkin.html?_r=2