WaPo Ombudsman: Obama Muslim Rumors Story "Not A Deliberate 'Smear Job'"

Stories about rumors are tricky and easily misconstrued. A Nov. 29 story and headline that explored Barack Obama's "connections to the Muslim world" and rumors that he is Muslim were met with a swift Internet reaction that left some staffers stunned at its ferocity. Even Post editorial cartoonist Tom Toles was "so upset" that he took the unusual step of taking potshots at the story in an editorial page cartoon.

My problems with the story by National Desk political reporter Perry Bacon Jr. and the headline ("Foes Use Obama's Muslim Ties to Fuel Rumors About Him") were that Obama's connections to Islam are slender at best; that the rumors were old; and that convincing evidence of their falsity wasn't included in the story.

Read the whole story here.

Comments

[MRb1000]

Man, why did she fire those people? I know because they got caught.

[LeeNYC]

What a relief! The hit on Obama was based on incompetence, not maliciousness. When I screw somebody at work, I'll use that argument. It will do wonders for my credibility. And then I'll say, a la the Washpost, that my "feewings" were hurt when folks couldn't discern a difference.

[vbond]

Rumors that The Washington Post supported the Nazis during WWII and participated in the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center have been reported.

To my knowledge, the paper has not denied them.

This is "not a deliberate smear."

[Ginzaman]

If it's not a deliberate smear job, then what would you call it? Better yet, I wonder what Obama's attorneys would say during discovery as they sue the Post into the ground for defamation (for starters)?

[SeanGardner]

Obama leads in new NEWSWEEK Poll out today: http://www.politicalforecast.net/2007/12/07/newsweek-gives-obama-huckabee-leads-in-iowa/

[Hopalongpoppyseed]

Rumors that WaPo writers molest children not true.

[swift_goat_pet_for_truth]

"Not deliberate Smear Job" = Smear Job

[godlessclif]

"Gee I really though he was a Muslim. Which Christian Saint is St. Hussein"...Hillary

Hillary accidentally smeared Obama?

Are we supposed to believe this stuff?

[zull2]

I accept that the Washington Post writers and editors are probably less talented and less skilled than the worst blog writers on the planet...that's fine by me. That is, if they're admitting that was a goof and not a smear job. Because if that was a goof, then it was a goof of the worst kind, and they should be doing more than just saying "my bad...but we were so surprised when people got mad at us...what we do wrong??"

You don't run a smear job that attempts to lend credibility to blatantly false information and then turn around and say "my bad! we goofed!!"

Helen Thomas has said many times that you don't make mistakes in this business, because one mistake and you're gone. Then why aren't these people being fired? Is it because...the paper was perfectly FINE with how it was all handled to begin with? I'm thinking they were.

[DMSmith]

There IS no defense for this article. To suggest that it was simply omissions, or poorly stated concepts, is to assume we are even stupider than we are.

The level and consistency of the omissions and distortions makes it clear it was purposeful.

SOMEone should be fired!!! (If not more)

[lungfish]

Obama's father is a Muslim... so what? He went to Punahoa school and claims to be a Christian, himself (not any better in my book) and I don't think that any candidate worth voting for should be anything but focused on keeping his religion out of his politics..
The only thing that bothers me is that Barak has only a couple of years experience as a Senator... that may not be a bad thing.
He is a better choice than Hillary who represents the lame Dem status quo but not as good as Kucinich.

[realitytrumpsbull]

Even if Obama WAS a muslim, that's fine, too.
Why not have a muslim president? Because,
after that, we can have a heathen president
(my favorite), a buddhist president, hmmm,
how about Rosicrucian, or Wiccan? Let's see,
what else is on the menu...you got your
Taoists, I don't know if the Moonies count
as a religion, all the Heaven's Gate people
killed themselves, how about Apollonian
or Zeusists or whatever? Norskist, like,
Thor, and all that stuff? I'm all about the
religious diversity, crap vs. junk is old
and boring. How about a Flying Saucerist,
or Mothershipian? Nevermind the Lebensborn
Mor(m)ons, let's open up the field a little.
What about a president that believes she'll
have another beer, and beat the man-slaves
in public, when she's not french-kissing her
wife? Yeah, a lesbian President that rides
to work on a Hog, wears an old US Army leather
flying cap and Ray-bans, thigh high boots,
and a leather string bikini. Saves money on dry cleaning! Big tats, too. God bless america, land of diversity!

[OleHippieChick]

Rumor mongering or incompetence (you decide!), both the story and the apologia are indefensible.

Lady Deborah of the Fainting Couch:

When a managing editor - in hindsight, yet - says the headline, display, and body of the piece all lacked clarity, as a copy editor, I can tell you that something was seriously wrong from the start with Bacon's story and no one cared to fix it before it went to press.

Hamilton had better think about how he edited the story and then look for a new field. Rumors like this won't die because his shoddy work won't let them. Deborah, YOU had problems with the story across the board and, as you point out, it didn't meet any Page 1 qualifications. Why did it run Page 1? Why did it run at all without major revision?

Hamilton is disingenuous in saying the story was "misunderstood." It was perfectly understood as being ill conceived, and it's now evident that it was very badly edited. Blatant hackery tends to make us respond in "unreasonable" ways, and that includes assuming your motives are malicious. You bring scorn and derision upon youselves! Why should we remain polite when stories like Bacon's insult our intelligence?

Yes, certain talk shows and message boards, CHAIN E-MAILS (for God's sake!), and the nutty Messiah Moon ARE vigorously pushing the "rumor." Did it occur to Bacon to question the political leanings of these pushers, and explain their rabidly right-wing nature and motivations? And he misquoted Snopes! Bacon should have been thoroughly queried on all these points. Or is Bacon too sophisticated for the careless Hamilton and the several equally careless "top editors"?

When words no longer matter, you no longer are mainstream journalists, you're corporate journalists, titillators, and you will be marginalized for the shabby journalism that formerly was given a wink, a nod, and a pass.

If corporate journalism doesn't keep us truthfully informed, we WILL find the truth elsewhere.

BE THE MEDIA.

[mcartri]

I want to dispel a rumor that the WaPo's Ombudsman story:Osama Muslim Rumors Story "Not a Deliberate 'Smear Job'" was hacked. According to sources I have at the Washington Times Livery Stable, "Not" was inserted in the correct title that the Obama rumor story was "A Deliberate "Smear Job'." I hope this rumor about a rumor story might be true.

[marleysghost]

It is a smear campaign pure and simple. The reason these hotshot reporters use this tactic is to be deliberately ambiguous in their wording so they can deny what is so obvious to the attentive reader. It is still slander, and the fact that the Washington Post would ,not only print it, but defend it by minimizing the impact of its slur, is simply morally corrupt. If you print sleaze, you are sleazy. It is no better than phrasing apologies that imply only that they are sorry they got caught.