Most Read: Opinions

direct signup

Today’s Opinions poll

Would you use an app that tells you the partisan affiliation of products you're considering buying?

Submit
Next
Review your answers and share
Erik Wemple
On Twitter E-mail |  On Twitter Follow |  On Facebook Fan |  RSS RSS Feed
Posted at 02:37 PM ET, 11/14/2012

NYT reporter scoffs at Hill staffer’s ‘background’ stipulation

Don’t see that sort of tweet every day.

The skinny is just as is appears: New York Times Magazine chief national correspondent Mark Leibovich had received an e-mail from Drew Hammill, a spokesman for Rep. Nancy Pelosi, promoting today’s much-traded story that the congresswoman will stay on as the House’s top Democrat. Hammill was following a great Washington tradition, attempting to “background” the quotes in the e-mail — that is, making them attributable to a “source close to Pelosi.”

Well, Leibovich had never signed on to that arrangement. He blasted it out via Twitter, outing Hammill as the “source close to Pelosi.”

Twitter, said Leibovich in a quick chat with the Erik Wemple Blog, is a great platform to expose the “preposterousness” of how the Washington flack-journo complex operates. In this case, the e-mail was clearly a mass affair, heading out to “hundreds, if not thousands, of reporters,” assumes Leibovich. And it came over his transom, says Leibovich, as the ”news of this was well out the door.”

As to the ground-rule dimension of the affair: “Can someone unilaterally declare something on background ... without consent of the reporter? I would say you can’t,” says Leibovich. That said: “I meant this in the context of the day-to-day absurdity of these transactions rather than making any grand statements about whether to honor unilaterally mandated ground rules.”

By  |  02:37 PM ET, 11/14/2012

Tags:  mark leibovich drew hammill pelosi, leibovich pelosi house of representiatives, mark leibovich pelosi

 
Read what others are saying
     

    © 2011 The Washington Post Company