Hillarysworld

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info
TOPIC: "More D.C. books controversy coming" (Politico 1/16/10)


Diamond

Status: Offline
Posts: 4567
Date:
"More D.C. books controversy coming" (Politico 1/16/10)
Permalink  
 


POLITICO

"

More D.C. books controversy coming

By MICHAEL CALDERONE | 1/16/10 3:04 PM EST

“Game Change” by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin has touched off a debate about anonymous sourcing and the accuracy of narrative-driven political books. But the debate isn’t likely to end soon because Bob Woodward and at least two other prominent political journalists, Jonathan Alter and Ryan Lizza, have similar books about the Obama administration coming out this year.

Woodward, the capital’s foremost fly-on-the-wall chronicler of political power, is unapologetic about using anonymous sourcing to enable high-level participants to give accounts of contemporary events. “It’s the only method if you’re going to get an unlaundered version of what occurred,” he said.

But Woodward balks at the idea that he was simply “recreating” scenes in his books. “It’s reported,” he said. “So-and-so was there and they said this. There are meeting notes and so forth.”

His new book, which he said is “going very well,” will use the same methods, and a White House official confirmed that Woodward is getting access to senior officials and will likely sit down with the president.

Alter, a Newsweek senior editor who will be first out of the gate with his Obama White House book — "The Promist: President Obama, Year One" — in May, said “the idea that you can write one of these books without using anonymous sources is erroneous.”

“Long-form journalism or works of history benefit from narrative drive,” Alter said. “Most of my scenes are quite short, but it is necessary to include some dialogue in order to take the reader as close as possible to what happened. In my reporting experience, people tend to remember quite well what the president said. I often rely on their memories if the quotations are short.”

Background sourcing can be essential, Alter said, because “you don’t want the source to be parsing every word. You want them to tell you what happened.”

Granting sources anonymity is a bargain made daily in Washington journalism, with the upside being proximity to the unvarnished truth. The downside: being spun by sources for their own purposes while under the cloak of anonymity.

“Game Change,” which has already been optioned by HBO, has a cinematic feel, complete with such controversy-courting details as a phone conversation between Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy in which Kennedy later “fumed that Clinton had said, A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee.”

What Clinton allegedly said isn’t in quotation marks — a practice that, according to the authors' note, “reflect[s] only a lack of certainty on the part of our sources about precise wording, not about the nature of the statements.” Although it may not be precise wording, several news organizations have run it as a verbatim quote from the 42nd president to the late lion of the Senate.

Plum Line blogger Greg Sargent questioned the methodology, writing that “in cases like these, when people are hinting at racism, the precise wording is everything. And in this case, the whole claim is based on an anonymous source’s recollection that someone who has now passed away told him or her that Clinton said something like this.”

For Sargent, “this really illustrates the perils of this approach to sourcing, particularly in the current media environment.”

More . . .

"

It's going to be interesting to see this 'sourcing" thing develop.


-- Edited by Sanders on Saturday 16th of January 2010 08:23:10 PM

__________________
Democracy needs defending - SOS Hillary Clinton, Sept 8, 2010
Democracy is more than just elections - SOS Hillary Clinton, Oct 28, 2010

Madam Secretary Blog at ForeignPolicy.com
Project Vote Smart - Stay informed and engaged!


Moderator

Status: Offline
Posts: 1695
Date:
Permalink  
 

Plum Line blogger Greg Sargent questioned the methodology, writing that “in cases like these, when people are hinting at racism, the precise wording is everything. And in this case, the whole claim is based on an anonymous source’s recollection that someone who has now passed away told him or her that Clinton said something like this.”

The above statement pretty much gets to the heart of the matter.  Not only is "precise wording" "everything", context, tone of voice, and other factors can be as important as the actual words.  In this case, as Sargent wisely points out, the person who allegedly made the supposed statement to some anonymous being, as told to someone's grandmother - is no longer alive.  And if he were alive, I wouldn't trust a word that came out of his mouth.  He certainly could not have been happy with the way Caroline was not given what he wanted her to have - after all, she should have been entitled to a job for which she was in no way qualified solely because uncle Teddy wanted it that way.  He didn't like the Clintons, and was not, I would imagine, inclined to say anything that would reflect positively on them.

I understand Woodward's point.  But, I believe that anything reported as fact must be verifiable - if necessary.  In other words, all the parties who are quoted at the time of publication must be alive, or have in some other way provided documentation.  Without the ability to prove facts, just call the damn book fiction. 

I don't know that I look particularly forward to Woodward's book, as it seems I have heard him treat Hillary unfairly - tho it may have been Burnstein, who is a total Clinton hater.  Either way.  We need the truth - not some ultra-liberal, jacked-up version of it.

__________________
It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union.... Men, their rights and nothing more; women, their rights and nothing less.  ~Susan B. Anthony

Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard