« Great Depression 2? Krugman went there | truthseeker77's Blog | Chas Freeman goes down with a fight »
TPM is either afraid of Rick Santelli, or full of sh*t
It is my understanding that TPM's new acquisition, Zachary Roth, (correct me if I'm wrong) wrote an article in the TPMMuckraker section of this blog questioning the spontaneity of Rick Santelli's now-famous "rant" against the government's mortgage relief plan.
Interestingly, now it appears that Roth's article has been removed. The article in question was apparently based on a piece authored by two Playboy Magazine bloggers, which has since been removed as well.
I will be very disappointed if it turns out that TPM chickened out under pressure from Santelli's lawyer(s). On the other hand, I will be equally pissed off if the article was removed because this site realized that it was uncritically spreading the unsubstantiated rumor, which was described today by Roth's previous employer (Columbia Journalism Review) as having "way overreached to claim Santelli's rant was a premeditated part of a conservative PR effort tied to the Koch family." (link)
I used to read Roth before and after he came to TPM and I always considered him to be an awesome reporter with exceptional fact-checking skills; therefore, I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Still, the whole thing reeks of screw-up.
The Atlantic' Megan McArdle thinks "the accusation against Santelli is potentially libelous, which is, I assume, why the article disappeared this morning." She added, "If I were Santelli, I'd sue." McArdle referred specifically to the Playboy piece.
Will Zachary explain why his post was yanked? Thanks.
Advertisement
"As a final note, the story is no longer available on Playboy's site. We've contacted the magazine to ask why, and will keep you posted. "
from google cache of the Roth TPM piece. So the Playboy item came down first.
"Rick Santelli and The Chicago Tea Party: How Spontaneous Was It?
By Zachary Roth - March 2, 2009, 3:11PM"
Was the Playboy item a hoax?
March 4, 2009 3:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why would you "be equally pissed off if the article was removed because this site realized that it was uncritically spreading the unsubstantiated rumor..."? Is TPM supposed to be the political equivalent of a celebrity tabloid, peddling gossip without any basis in fact?
Frankly, it wouldn't surprise me if that were exactly the reason it was yanked. I completely disagree with your assessment of Roth's reporting. I've found many instances where he gives misleading headliners and over-reaches in his conclusions. So far, I think his reporting has been sub-par by TPM's standards. I hope Roth can learn from his mistakes, otherwise I think his tenure at TPM will be relatively short.
March 4, 2009 9:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not a big fan of conspiracy theories, but when stories just disappear, instead of having corrections/updates about them, that smells fishy no matter what the reason is.
If TPM made a mistake in their story, they should print that, at the top of the story if need be. They should not simply pretend the story never existed.
March 4, 2009 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm looking and looking at the Constitution on my nifty iPhone Constitution app, and I'm not finding the part where blog readers have a right to know if the story was yanked because of a threatened a libel suit.
March 4, 2009 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
That doesn't make it not a conspiracy!!
March 4, 2009 6:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
He said the site "should" clarify. He did not say it had the obligation to do so. So your mention of the Constitution is an exaggeration.
March 4, 2009 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pretty much what ts77 said. I'm not saying they're legally obligated to—they're not. It's just that I have certain expectations from TPM, and they seem the ethical kind of site that would tell us, so I don't understand why they don't.
March 5, 2009 1:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is a new Santelli piece on the front page, but it is a new Flash type which doesn't work here.
:(
March 5, 2009 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Until Playboy issues a retraction, this story has legs. The fact that both of the stories have disappeared from the fold is disturbing. Readers have a right to know if Santelli is threatening libel and if the story is or is not bogus.
The fact remains that the Santelli "call to arms," was followed by an orchestrated attempt to create an astroturf movement dedicated to blaming minorities and deadbeats for the subprime crisis. The fact remains that Santelli formerly traded the very securities that are in fact responsible for the current crisis. So, he does have a motive for shifting the blame onto the backs of the disenfranchised, and the conservatives have a motive piggybacking on these sentiments in order to beat the obstructionist drum. That the Koch family would have a financial hand in making these parties into bedfellows... that is the only missing link that makes the story sing.
March 4, 2009 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
There you Zip. Well said. I am more interested in the 'meat' anyway. Let us blame the poor and the disenfranchised, say the repubs. Balderdash.
Of course it was a put on by Santelli. Every time repubs put out some tired mantra, it is a put on, a staging.
March 4, 2009 12:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I won't venture a guess on why the pieces might have been removed. But, dear friends, to act shocked that a piece of dubious information found its way onto an internet site!
March 4, 2009 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or even the Washington Post or New York Times, for that matter!
Don't just single out Internet sites, please. Equal opps for all news media.
March 4, 2009 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
That it made it to the internet does not surprise me. What surprises me is that it made its way into the blog of a renounced journalist/researcher who recently worked in the Columbia Journalism Review, which supposedly taught him a thing or two about fact-checking things in depth before hitting the submit button.
March 4, 2009 7:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I guess Megan McArdle can add being a shitty non-lawyer to her resume along with being a shitty non-economist.
March 4, 2009 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I still don't get why anybody, on the left or right, gives a shit about Santelli's rant, orchestrated or not. I mean, if (say) Rick Sanchez of CNN was doing a piece in front of a group of striking workers and flipped out, going off about how the bankers and assorted robber barons were responsible for screwing us over with the workers cheering him on, would it really become some kind of populist rallying cry for the left? Somehow I doubt it.
It seems to me that Santelli is just one more carbon-copy crank with a swollen head of the type that gravitate towards CNBC and Fox, and all this hullabaloo is giving him more attention than he deserves.
March 4, 2009 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Santelli should sue for being a Sub-human? Sure, let that mf'r come here and give his rant and I will stick my foot so far up his ass that he will be able to smell my feet. Pathetic waste of human space that he is.
March 4, 2009 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the story on alternet.org. It has the text of the original post on "Playboy".
http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/129656/the_rick_santelli_'tea_party'_controversy%3A_article_kicks_up_a_media_dust_storm/
March 4, 2009 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Courage in journalism...
March 4, 2009 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is not the first time TPM has behaved in this way. I have seen at least one other important post pulled without comment. It can only be said that TPM is somewhat more open than the corporate media. No one is free until we are all free.
March 4, 2009 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink