« Democrat Brian Colón Announces Education and Job Training Plan to Celebrate National Teacher Day | Main | NM Insurance Superintendent Morris J. Chavez Resigns, Cites Online Criticism »
Tuesday, May 04, 2010
Must Read: New Mexico Watchdog Exposed as Right-Wing Hack Operation
Tracy Dingamann has a must-read piece today on Clearly New Mexico about the growing -- and troubling -- phenomenon of allegedly investigative (or "scoop") journalists generously funded by right-wing, "free market" money. Dingmann discusses the findings of journalist Laura McGann, who wrote a Washington Monthly piece entitled, “Partisan Hacks: Conservatives Have Discovered the Virtues of Investigative Journalism. But Can Their Reporting Survive Their Politics?” McGann is an assistant editor at the prestigious Nieman Journalism Lab at Harvard University and former editor of the nonprofit news site the Washington Independent,
One of the "journalists" studied by McGann is none other than Jim Scarantino, who operates the New Mexico Watchdog website and is more than willing to brag about his journalistic skills. Partisan advocate? No way, claims Jim. But what McGann finds out about Scarantino's site and others like it isn't pretty.
McGann also lays out serious problems with The Franklin Center, which funds Scarantino's efforts and similar "Watchdog" sites around the country. The rumor is that Scarantino gets $75,000 a year to make The Franklin Center happy. The Center is run by a Republican political consultant with no journalism background, so you can imagine what that means. Bottom line: McGann concludes that "ideologically motivated, willfully misleading muckraking may be a well-worn strategy among partisan operatives. But it isn’t journalism."
Please go read the entire post on Clearly New Mexico. Knowledge is power!
May 4, 2010 at 03:11 PM in Journalism, Right Wing | Permalink
Comments
Ha caught in the act! Scarantino is nothing but a guy pretending to be a journalist so he can attack Democrats.
Posted by: TruthSquad | May 4, 2010 3:51:40 PM
This is just one reason why a viable true liberal media is needed and why taxes need to be significantly increased on the richest Americans ,e.g. the Kochs.
Posted by: LarryInNM | May 4, 2010 3:52:10 PM
Why don't wealthy liberals and organizations support TV, radio and online media?
Posted by: Sean | May 4, 2010 4:10:51 PM
Why is Scarantino presented on TV and in the newspaper as a fair and factual journalist? Does he pay them off or are they fooled by his creepy grin?
Posted by: Why | May 4, 2010 4:57:09 PM
Here's what the AP's Matt Apuzzo said about my reporting. It's the opposite of what the Washington Monthly implies (they must not have actually read the article):
"THE FACTS: Scarantino's original report was correct, and his analysis was the latest discovery of problems in the massive database of stimulus spending," Here's the entire AP story at Real Clear Politics: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/news/ap/politics/2009/Nov/18/fact_check__stimulus_money_to__phantom__districts_.html
Posted by: Jim Scarantino | May 4, 2010 5:48:24 PM
It's about the message, folks
not about the messenger.
You don't have to be on fire to be pointing to one.
Allegations stand alone; they are justified or they are not. Who makes them, doesn't play.
Attacking the messenger instead of the message is an age old defense for an indefensible position.
If there is a defense for any other report except the one mentioned in the citation, I would very much like to hear it.
Where else was he wrong?
Posted by: ched macquigg | May 4, 2010 6:03:11 PM
excuse me, "allegedly" wrong?
Posted by: ched macquigg | May 4, 2010 6:04:57 PM
Read it. And I invite everyone to read the whole thing. It's all quite clear.
Apuzzo's conclusion:
"There are problems with the stimulus data being reported, problems that call into question how accurate the job count is. But the "phantom congressional districts" are being used as a phantom issue to suggest that stimulus money has been misspent."
Tracy
Real Clear Politics article
Posted by: Tracy Dingmann | May 4, 2010 6:38:24 PM
"Why don't wealthy liberals and organizations support TV, radio and online media?"
Sean, they do. They give to Public Broadcasting and foundations. Some are bloggers for little pay.
Posted by: Michelle Meaders | May 4, 2010 6:44:52 PM
Tracy: You're being dishonest. Apuzzo's conclusions were about others were doing with my reporting, not with the accuracy of what I found, specifically that the recovery.org website was reporting millions going to nonexistent congressional districts. In the article even I criticized people who were distorting my findings.
Posted by: Jim Scarantino | May 4, 2010 7:28:01 PM
Nope.
Posted by: Tracy Dingmann | May 4, 2010 9:54:29 PM
I see Scarantino is still being dishonest. His "reporting" was accurate up to a point and that point was where inaccurate and inflammatory statements could be made about it for political gain. A real journalist would have dug until the end to find out what happened. Scarantino didn't do that because he got what he wanted and the right wing echo chamber (and other lazy news outfits) helped spread it.
It's the same pattern being seen all over the country as the Washington Monthly article points out. It's cherry picking of the worst sort coupled with a ready made propaganda machine waiting to spread the distortions. Scarantino is paid by a political operative to dig up crap that can be used to bolster right wingers. Can it be more obvious?
Posted by: barb | May 5, 2010 9:35:14 AM
Some might argue that those on the far left are just as eager to cherry pick (their Tea Party representatives for example) and then spread distortions.
Who are you to decide where someone else's job begins and ends?
Posted by: ched macquigg | May 5, 2010 12:54:18 PM
We're talking about someone who purports to be a serious investigative journalist here, not a blogger or pundit. I don't decide where someone's job begins and ends, but I can certainly help get the truth out there on someone who claims to be what he is not, not just according to my opinion, but according to the careful analysis of a noted journalist who knows her stuff.
Posted by: barb | May 5, 2010 3:12:18 PM
When I come across anything written by Jim Scarantino, I just stop reading. I made that decision after reading one of his posts. I find it odd that anyone pays him, then again people read what Sarah Palin writes. It is a strange world we live in.
Posted by: Alfredo Dominguez III | May 6, 2010 1:38:51 AM
