In case you missed it---Former Post executive editor Ben Bradlee confessed many years ago to having “residual fear” that some of the details of the Watergate narrative — namely Bob Woodward’s cloak-and-dagger relationship with Deep Throat — weren’t quite “straight.” He has also said that he trusts Woodward through and through. Any way those two feelings can coexist?
Also: Local news provider DNAinfo.com of New York is expanding and hiring. That’s news. But does the site provide a way forward — a model — for other news entrepreneurs? That’s a bit unlikely, considering the ownership. One further point about DNAinfo.com — the site’s publisher contended that there’s no competition in all of New York for DNAinfo.com’s neighborhood focus. Here’s what a commenter had to say about that:
Even if you don’t call print products a competitor - which is fair - there are tons of digital pureplays providing original reporting at the neighborhood level across NYC. I know because I’m one of them, as the editor in chief of SheepsheadBites.com and BensohurstBean.com in Brooklyn. There are at least a dozen independent sites scattered across the city, like the amazing Lo-Down, Ditmas Park Corner and Roosevelt Islander. Most of them are run by entrepreneurs, not enthusiasts.
*Getting back to the Bradlee-Woodward thing: Dylan Byers of Politico chronicles all the back and forth among Bradlee biographer Jeff Himmelman, Woodward and Bradlee. Upshot? These guys are going at it.
*A group of British lawmakers accuses Rupert Murdoch of some bad things in the whole phone-hacking scandal:
“He turned a blind eye and exhibited willful blindness to what was going on in his companies.
“We conclude, therefore, that Rupert Murdoch is not a fit person to exercise the stewardship of a major international company,” the report by the panel of 11 lawmakers said.
Trouble with the report is that it reflects partisan divisions on the Culture, Media and Sport select committee, which issued the document. Via Huffington Post:
The report was highly divided along political lines, chiefly due to the surprisingly harsh criticism of Murdoch. Members of the opposition Labour party voted as a bloc, along with one Liberal Democrat, to insert the passages, over the objections of all of the Conservative members. At a press conference, Louise Mensch, a Conservative member of the committee, said that the report was “partisan” and “damaged” by the controversial sections.
*The Atlantic asks an important question: Hey, where do all those cute animal photos at BuzzFeed come from?
BuzzFeed pays licensing fees to Reuters, AP, and Getty Images for the use of their libraries.
But a lot of what BuzzFeed traffics in — the fun stuff, that is — emerges on Tumblr or Pinterest or 4chan. Users of those sites surface photos that in some cases have been shared around the Internet for a decade. In those cases, even if BuzzFeed editors try to track down the creator, which [site founder Jonah] Peretti assures me they do, they probably won’t find whoever uploaded the photo of every obese cat.
*Bill O’Reilly and Bernard Goldberg discuss Dan Rather, who, according to O’Reilly, bailed on an interview on the “O’Reilly Factor.” Goldberg guesses that Rather would rather be interviewed by an “ideological soulmate, whether it’s George Stephanopolous or Chris Matthews or somebody like that.”
*Demand Media, that huge online content farm, has reportedly turned into an M&A target.
*Business Insider slams Google for “paid inclusion.”