Honestly, Who Writes The Politico Headlines?

Another day, another misleading headline from Politico about the Obama transition team. Hey, as long as they keep churning them out, we're gonna keep throwing the flag.

The latest: "Holder pardon makes Dems squirm."

Obviously, it's an article about Obama's pick of Eric Holder to be his AG, and specifically a look at Holder's role in the the last-minute pardon granted to Marc Rich in 2001. The press, desperate for some sort of conflict narrative, has been clinging to the story.

But look at the headline, "Holder pardon makes Dems squirm." Pretty simple, right? Clearly the article will include evidence--quotes, anecdotes, etc.--indicating how Dems are squirming about Holder's pardon role, right? You'd think. But this is Politico, where editors clearly feel no reason why headlines should match the article's content because, FYI, Politico provide zero evidence--none--that a single Democrat is squirming. Not one Dem in the article raises real-time concerns about the pardon.

Question: Why would Politico attach a headline that claims Dems are squirming if Politico has no evidence Dems are squirming? Answer: It makes the article seem more interesting. It helps sell the content. But last time we checked that's called marketing, not journalism.

Crossposted at County Fair, a Media Matters for America blog.

Comments

[S1m0n]

HuffPo headlines can (and have been) similarly agressive in interpreting the facts of a story; it's just that these confirm our beliefs, so to us they don't look stretched.

[realpolitic]

As with any conservative rag, the Politico is more sensationalistic than substantive. Conservative journalism is always a race to the bottom.

[Joseph A. Palermo - Huffpost Blogger]

You are so correct -- who on Earth gives a damn about the Mark Rich pardon -- I mean, if the Mark Rich pardon is the thing that really gets you riled up -- not the Iraq war or torture or environmental degradation or Alberto Gonzales or Karl Rove -- I mean if you're upset about some stupid pardon that Clinton made -- "But, but Clinton . . . " then you're probably still steaming about the fact he was fellated in the oval office -- Politico is a site looking for a premise like a Pirandello play.

[realpolitic]

So right! I have read many conservatives who blog hear who are incensed about the Marc Rich pardon. They conveniently ignore Bush's illegal war, his failure to act after Hurricane Katrina, his politicalization of the Justice department, his torture practices, etc. They have the selective ability to ignore these catastrophes and to worry about a pardon of a wealthy businessman. Their outrage is always very selective. They are the same people who have suddenly remembered deficits and accountability now that there is a new Democratic administration in town.

[lovable]

politico is a joke . and there so called reporters are pundits not reporters .

[MB141]

Eric - you're the best media critic in the business...Politico's headlines are ridiculous...

[burndtdan]

the more correct headline would be:
"POLITICO Hopes Holder Makes Dems Squirm"

[LizM]

Eric,

You, and others at Media Matters deserve our deepest gratitude and unending support for what you do. You give us hope. I don't know how we...OK, I don't know how I would cope without you all - and, I mean that sincerely. Keep the faith!

All the best!
Elizabeth

[aznurse]

I've been squirming waiting for Bush's term to end.

[LightningJoe]

You, and two hundred million other people...

[TrippleD99]

Another thing about the headline. It was Bill Clinton's pardon not Holder's.

[ali-remixamerica]

I could not agree with this more. All through the election cycle I went to Politico every day, because they did have some great sources and accurate inside info and I thought the writing was strong. However, the headlines were misleading on such a regular basis, that it became a game for me of trying to guess what the story would actually turn out to be despite the headline.

[nogonzo]

Thank you, Eric. I have been feeling the headline annoyance too, but not raising it to the level of consciousness. Tricky! Ad revenue for clicks, I'd say?