wpostServer: http://css.washingtonpost.com/wpost2

Most Read: Opinions

direct signup

Today’s Opinions poll

Will Rep. Paul Ryan's anti-poverty proposal help the poor?

Submit
Next
Review your answers and share
Erik Wemple
On Twitter E-mail |  On Twitter Follow |  On Facebook Fan |  RSS RSS Feed
Posted at 08:16 AM ET, 11/15/2011

Media news derivatives: Nov. 15

In case you missed it---On Saturday night, the campaign of Michele Bachmann was calling for the dismissal of CBS political director and Slate columnist John Dickerson. The point of anger was the e-mail he sent suggesting that his first preference for a guest on his post-debate web show was not Michele Bachmann. Well, it doesn’t appear that disciplinary measures are underway, as well they should not be. Dickerson should have been even more dismissive in that much-trafficked e-mail.

Also: The towering hypocrisy of Chelsea Clinton.

Elsewhere:

●Jon Stewart spends a few minutes highlighting thoughtful Republican debaters saying insightful things about foreign policy and then asks: “Think there’s any way for them to spin their mastery of the issues as a strength?”

The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Indecision 2012 - Saturday Right Fever
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full EpisodesPolitical Humor & Satire BlogThe Daily Show on Facebook

●What’s up with the NewsBeast? We’ve been hearing a drumbeat for some time that the thing is bleeding, not making it. Official confirmation came yesterday in the form of executive departures. Politico’s Keach Hagey writes this:

The publisher was let go and the managing editor and executive editor resigned – signs of both how hard it has been for the money-losing magazine and website to turn things around, and how challenging it can be to work in the shadow of publishing’s most famous, and often fickle, editor.

That would be Tina Brown.

●What percentage of adults in the U.K. say that the phone-hacking scandal has had a negative impact on their feelings about the credibility of their country’s media? You would guess that it’s got to be more than 75 percent, right? Or perhaps within the margin of error for 100 percent, right? I mean, given 1) How many important news outlets are owned or controlled by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. in the U.K.; 2) How deeply the phone-hacking scandal has dug into the public conscience; and 3) How it has exposed the tactics of the British press in general.

Plus, we’re talking about a low bar here. The question is whether the phone-hacking scandal has negatively impacted your feelings on the U.K. press.

Yet the number is just 58 percent. Just what is that other 42 percent thinking? That the phone-hacking scandal has enhanced the credibility of the British press?

●Erin Burnett of CNN refuses to trash Herman Cain for his Libya misfire, saying that the candidate looked “exhausted.” James Carville is far less charitable and far more right.

●Mogulite presents a killer takedown of an Economist piece on sexual harassment. The critique zeroes in on this passage from the Economist story:

Mr. Simmons thinks sexual harassment is much less widespread in the American workplace than it was in the 1990s. The number of harassment cases tracked by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has risen, but this is probably because victims are more likely to report it.

Take it away, Mogulite’s Amy Tennery: “Oh, sure. Because risking your job, career and livelihood in order to call out your boss for harassing you is a total breeze. That’s the reason we hear about it so often today, right?”

All of this is perhaps another reason why women shouldn’t read the Economist.

By  |  08:16 AM ET, 11/15/2011

 
Read what others are saying
     

    © 2011 The Washington Post Company