It's official: the Washington Post Has Become Pravda

[Roma_Victrix]

Regardless of your opinion of Edward Snowden, there's no doubting that major news outlets like The Washington Post have become mouthpieces for the government, parroting their talking points, and putting stories like this at the top of the list on their website:

NSA program defenders question Snowden’s motives

Without presenting any evidence for the claim that Snowden was contacted and groomed by Russian operatives before his revelations, they just throw this idea out there to see if it sticks. Judging from the comments section, the newspaper's own readers aren't buying it.

It's a classic deflection: the government doesn't want us talking about the NSA's mass collection of metadata and phone records of all citizens, they want us talking about Snowden's supposed "motives."

On a sad note: has the Washington Post become Pravda (Правда)?

[Henry of Grosmont]

Ah, for a second I thought the Russians bought the paper.

[Col. Tartleton]

I wish we had Russian Media.

[YuriVII]

I wish we had Russian police, never get a speeding ticket again.

[Hookah Smoking Caterpiller]

I wish we had Russian police, never get a speeding ticket again.

Just sit by there Ladas and smoke.

[Garbarsardar]

Regardless of your opinion of Edward Snowden, there's no doubting that major news outlets like The Washington Post have become mouthpieces for the government, parroting their talking points, and putting stories like this at the top of the list on their website:

NSA program defenders question Snowden’s motives

Without presenting any evidence for the claim that Snowden was contacted and groomed by Russian operatives before his revelations, they just throw this idea out there to see if it sticks. Judging from the comments section, the newspaper's own readers aren't buying it.

It's a classic deflection: the government doesn't want us talking about the NSA's mass collection of metadata and phone records of all citizens, they want us talking about Snowden's supposed "motives."

On a sad note: has the Washington Post become Pravda (Правда)?

WP does not put stories on "top of lists", the story was on the top of the most read list. Do you claim that the readers are NSA agents too?

Apart from that WP reports on the accusations of a Republican Senator from Texas. Do you suggest WP should not have reported his statements?

If you look closely that you see that the author of the piece has no background in politics. She is basically a tech reporter. No wonder then she cannot delve deeper into the subject.

You can say that probably the piece should be aired by someone more experienced or that the standards of WP failed at this instance. But Pravda? really?

Why don't you refer to this piece then? One of the many that give the podium to Snowden, without any opposition, and this time, written by an experienced political editor of WP.

[conon394]

Regardless of your opinion of Edward Snowden, there's no doubting that major news outlets like The Washington Post have become mouthpieces for the government, parroting their talking points, and putting stories like this at the top of the list on their website:

NSA program defenders question Snowden’s motives

Without presenting any evidence for the claim that Snowden was contacted and groomed by Russian operatives before his revelations, they just throw this idea out there to see if it sticks. Judging from the comments section, the newspaper's own readers aren't buying it.

It's a classic deflection: the government doesn't want us talking about the NSA's mass collection of metadata and phone records of all citizens, they want us talking about Snowden's supposed "motives."

On a sad note: has the Washington Post become Pravda (Правда)?

Looks more like a quick round up of what people said on the Sunday round table news shows about Snowden. 'If had been front page' or if this turns into a talking point across congress and the administration and than the WP simply parrots it day after day that would be different.

[Heinz Guderian]

Regardless of your opinion of Edward Snowden, there's no doubting that major news outlets like The Washington Post have become mouthpieces for the government, parroting their talking points, and putting stories like this at the top of the list on their website:

NSA program defenders question Snowden’s motives

Without presenting any evidence for the claim that Snowden was contacted and groomed by Russian operatives before his revelations, they just throw this idea out there to see if it sticks. Judging from the comments section, the newspaper's own readers aren't buying it.

It's a classic deflection: the government doesn't want us talking about the NSA's mass collection of metadata and phone records of all citizens, they want us talking about Snowden's supposed "motives."

On a sad note: has the Washington Post become Pravda (Правда)?

If you consider the list of news outlets which can be described as "government mouthpieces" - i wouldnt consider The Washy Post to be on it especially if you remember their involvement in the printing of the leaked Diplomatic Cables.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Indeed as Heinz and Garb have said i think this is more a reflection on the authors lack of depth and rather shoddy writing than on the WP itself, who I've always held as quite a good example of an independent press, who tend to be quite reliable (though not as detailed as other more specialist sources on the subjects they cover).

So saying their a government mouth piece is quite a stretch my friend!

[conon394]

Indeed as Heinz and Garb have said i think this is more a reflection on the authors lack of depth and rather shoddy writing than on the WP itself, who I've always held as quite a good example of an independent press, who tend to be quite reliable (though not as detailed as other more specialist sources on the subjects they cover).

So saying their a government mouth piece is quite a stretch my friend!

Lack of depth seems hard just as the Op critism - this was a minor story about a couple of comments. I would not expect a huge examination unless as I said Anonymous admin officials and other Congress tpes start with the same thing

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Lack of depth seems hard just as the Op critism - this was a minor story about a couple of comments. I would not expect a huge examination unless as I said Anonymous admin officials and other Congress tpes start with the same thing

Please don't get me wrong, i'm not criticizing Roma in any way, i quite respect his posts! And indeed his perspective is one that can be put forward, i just don't agree with it my friend.

As to calling the article out on a lack of depth, this may be my personal ocd, but people writing articles should know what their talking about enough to do it well. If your going to write an article, then write an article for gawds sake! The writer on this occasion doesn't provide much in the way of substance or analysis. This may be due to, as others have pointed out, that this area isn't really the writers field...in which case i'd say why are they writing about it at all then for publication? Give the piece to someone who's field it is to write.

The couple of comments could have been expanded on also. But again this is just my personal response!

[conon394]

As to calling the article out on a lack of depth, this may be my personal ocd, but people writing articles should know what their talking about enough to do it well.

Well at what? it was a 'back page' Monday morning round up of what a few congressmen said about Snowden on the Sunday TV.

If your going to write an article, then write an article for gawds sake! The writer on this occasion doesn't provide much in the way of substance or analysis.

In less than 24 hours, you are missing the point of the story it looks like as I said a simple summary of recent Snowden news which is fine.

This may be due to, as others have pointed out, that this area isn't really the writers field...in which case i'd say why are they writing about it at all then for publication? Give the piece to someone who's field it is to write.

Again - this was clearly just a simple basic 'news' update story. If you had not been following Snowden closely you learn some Congressmen are alleging a Russian tie in yesterday and damage to US intel, that the President's panel made recommendations and he said he would implement them, privacy advocates are unhappy - still. Perhaps the only thing it lacked was the conflicting court rulings. I mean for comparison when I go to look for a story on the red wings and how they did a basic game summary is fine. I don't expect some kind of cumulative season analysis nor a play by play transcription. Although Ironically the story does link to the transcript of Meet the Press - I commend that - but being online it could have linked to other recent WP coverage as well.

As I said why do more unless the same concept - Snowden as spy, and damage to the US etc starts getting leaked by the Admin and the same Congressmen keep up the drumbeat - that deserves more reporting, also of course we don't know they are not planning an investigative piece but like I said you don't pull that out of your butt in less than a day.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

Well at what? it was a 'back page' Monday morning round up of what a few congressmen said about Snowden on the Sunday TV.



In less than 24 hours, you are missing the point of the story it looks like as I said a simple summary of recent Snowden news which is fine.



Again - this was clearly just a simple basic 'news' update story. If you had not been following Snowden closely you learn some Congressmen are alleging a Russian tie in yesterday and damage to US intel, that the President's panel made recommendations and he said he would implement them, privacy advocates are unhappy - still. Perhaps the only thing it lacked was the conflicting court rulings. I mean for comparison when I go to look for a story on the red wings and how they did a basic game summary is fine. I don't expect some kind of cumulative season analysis nor a play by play transcription. Although Ironically the story does link to the transcript of Meet the Press - I commend that - but being online it could have linked to other recent WP coverage as well.

As I said why do more unless the same concept - Snowden as spy, and damage to the US etc starts getting leaked by the Admin and the same Congressmen keep up the drumbeat - that deserves more reporting, also of course we don't know they are not planning an investigative piece but like I said you don't pull that out of your butt in less than a day.

Your points are fair my friend, though i would say your suggestions on how to improve it through the linking of other articles rather supports my perspective!

As i've said, the trouble is, the basic news update isn't exactly news... nor do i believe it was necessary and warranting of an article in it's own right. I'm pretty sure the WP will put out a more indepth piece, but why not wait for that. This may be just a pet peeve of mine to be honest, heralding from the SNP and co's abysmal 'articles on Independence' that i mislike short, lite articles which lack actual detail. For me wanting to find out about Snowden and the case, this article would be pretty awful lets be honest, as you said for an intro-fine, but it dosen't go into greater detail about any of the particulars, nor does it even link you to those areas so you delve deeper. I'd say that's a fail at being a news source!

On topic though, i think since we both agree that the article is merely an intro, it's safe to say that Roma's perspective of the WP being a government mouthpiece based around this particular article is a stretch too far.

[Earl Dibbles Jr]

Every media outlet in the U.S. is a biased joke.

[conon394]

Every media outlet in the U.S. is a biased joke.

So where is the bias here?

[Roma_Victrix]

I created the title out of sheer annoyance with the WP that day; it probably is a stretch too far since it doesn't reflect the good work done by other members of its staff, such as Eugene Robinson for example. I also enjoy reading Alexandra Petri's articles for their observational humor. However, the article in question did strike me as either lazy reporting of TV talking heads at best (most likely the case) or the media's usual sleazy, servile coddling of congressmen to maintain good relations for the sake of "access" they wouldn't have if they somehow offended said congressmen's sensibilities (like pointing out the obvious flaws in their bogus baseless claims that Snowden was contacted by Russian operatives and handed government secrets over to them in a premeditated effort). The article struck me as presenting nothing but character assassination with little substance and gave enormous weight to the opinions of a couple dingle-berries that aren't worth our time despite being our elected leaders.

[Dante Von Hespburg]

I created the title out of sheer annoyance with the WP that day; it probably is a stretch too far since it doesn't reflect the good work done by other members of its staff, such as Eugene Robinson for example. I also enjoy reading Alexandra Petri's articles for their observational humor. However, the article in question did strike me as either lazy reporting of TV talking heads at best (most likely the case) or the media's usual sleazy, servile coddling of congressmen to maintain good relations for the sake of "access" they wouldn't have if they somehow offended said congressmen's sensibilities (like pointing out the obvious flaws in their bogus baseless claims that Snowden was contacted by Russian operatives and handed government secrets over to them).

I think that's a fair position to hold my friend. I'd agree with the possibility of the lazy reporting as i've said, in all honesty though i'm not really qualified to construe an argument for or against the second, not knowing enough about inner US politic! Though i would say maybe as an argument against the article being biased against Snowden is the fact it's not really detailed enough to have any apparent bias- beyond those which may probably be attributed to it's rather shoddy nature as an article in itself!

Though the fact the press does seem to concentrate a lot in general on Snowden and not the actual NSA does rather give us pause for thought as to why certain media groups find him more interesting than government super spying apparatus. (At least in the UK we get a lot about the man...and not the beast which provoked the man).

[conon394]

The article struck me as presenting nothing but character assassination with little substance and gave enormous weight to the opinions of a couple dingle-berries that aren't worth our time despite being our elected leaders.

How do you assassinate the character of somebody who shafted his fellow employes, violated his oaths, harmed the US (his own country) and than fled to those bastions of personal freedom China and Russia under the Czar and than pontificated about individual freedom in the press (as I have said before women in Pussy Riot have more credibility) and refused to accept any consequences for his actions? I mean honestly I would take a bet he was spy with real money.

[knight of meh]

How do you assassinate the character of somebody who shafted his fellow employes

people do that all the time

harmed the US

that's more patriotic than a valid reason , remember you were supposedly the bad guys here

than fled to those bastions of personal freedom China and Russia under the Czar

i would too... he obviously wasn't going to get a fair trial and Russia seems like a safe bet for hiding difficult extradition laws at best , and judging his actions by association is flawed

I mean honestly I would take a bet he was spy with real money.

that matters? turns out he was right...

[conon394]

that matters? turns out he was right...

Right about what?

Two different federal judges issued contradictory findings about internal date accumulation, and I am still looking for somebody to point out any illegal or unconstitutional aspect to the fact the NSA spied on foreigners.

people do that all the time

Maybe - but so you are OK with that? Hey my kid was just going into Cancer therapy good thing I just lost my job and health care and pension because Snowden screwed me.

that's more patriotic than a valid reason , remember you were supposedly the bad guys here

Are we according to whom - spying on other countries than we all are bad (*). Exceeding the law internally maybe be maybe not and so far all I really see is maybe not with a dose of laws that were to vague.

* Show me the Lilly White country with no foreign intel apparatus... Again the US budget is an open secret as is the NSA and its budget whining that they are simply good at what they are asked to do is silly and outside of some interpretations of some activities in the US there is nothing they did wrong.