They Were Undercover Campaign Volunteers

The whole idea of OffTheBus is to report more of the campaign. But we're not the only ones trying to do that. Philadelphia City Paper just pitched in with two separate but exactly parallel reports, which we've reprinted here at OffTheBus:

* I was a Clinton Volunteer, reported by Tom Namako.

* I was an Obama Volunteer, reported by Mike Newall.

They're both writers for City Paper who chose to go undercover to find out how the volunteer operations for both candidates actually worked. Newall had covered the New Hampshire primary. "Any time I flashed my reporter credentials in a campaign office, I was quickly shown the door." This time he took a different approach. "I signed up to volunteer under a fake name." (His was Mike Kelly).

You can argue in the comments about whether that's the right thing to do. Journalists would disagree on it. What's fascinating is to absorb their parallel accounts--Tom's experience, Mike's experience--and see the different culture of the two campaigns unfold. Read both and you will know why the Caucus states turned out as they did.

---------
flickr: wetwebwork

Follow Jay Rosen on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jayrosen_nyu

Comments

[blim]

In my mind, you and your "citizen journalist" movement has lost all credibility--no matter how much you try to spin it by giving examples of other unethical people. I still feel totally betrayed by a movement I totally believed in. My daughter is teaching students in Lebanon to be "citizen journalists" and I have used what you did to urge her to teach "ethics" along with the writing and posting. Your "gotcha'" was a basic sellout for self-interest and had nothing to do with ethics or truth. Haven't we had enough of the lies and deception and, now, a movement which was important and exciting in itself--for a better media--for accurate information--for truth and not spin, has been thoroughly sullied. This story would have gone nowhere if the Fouler and you, as editor, would have given the true CONTEXT of what was said, how, and why. Obviously neither you nor your lady friend were Obama supporters­--bothered by a couple of mischosen words used by Obama to accurately explain a real perception of some people, words obviously used without malice or condescension. You both were out to "get him" for your own "glorification." Why don't you use your spying techniques to go after Mccain and his campaign, someone who potentially will bring this country down once and for all, if elected, --maybe then you could get the name recognition you so desperately seek. I would still consider it "slick" and unethical.

[SMP]

heres another tib-bit to think about


found on CNN's political ticker


But over the past few months, her presidential campaign has taken its apparent embrace of former media adversaries to a new level, sending reporters articles that praise Clinton and attack Barack Obama drawn from conservative outlets including the National Review and the American Spectator, and quotes from Republican pundits like Ed Rollins and Grover Norquist.

And former President Bill Clinton made an appearance on talker Rush Limbaugh's show the day of the Texas and Ohio primaries - contests in which the conservative radio host had urged listeners to vote for Hillary Clinton as a means of sabotaging the Democratic nominating process.


this is how she wins....dont be dupted this time

[Testtubebaby]

You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.

There is no justification in this world for Ms. Fowler’s deceit and hit piece, but I'm sure she thanks you for trying.

[aricogfj]

This does not give you cover for the Mayhill farce.....the horses have already left the barn.

[aricogfj]

I volenteered for Barack and was amazed the the Clinton camp ask you to donate as a voluneteer. Most of us donate to Barack because we want to....I was never asked to do so in the volunteer offices...­.amazing..­..

[kellygrrrl]

so if America is a company
and we are interviewing for a CEO
which of these organizations sounds like the well-oiled machine?

Obama 08

[SamThornton]

Thanks for the links, Jay. And thanks to Tom Namako and Mike Newall. Together, they provide glimpses into two forms of chaos, one creative, the other dysfunctional. (I'll let the reader decide which is which.) Pennsylvania becomes another interesting test case in what approach survives the Law of Large Numbers.

N.B. Don't quite understand the fulminations by users 'amnd' and 'ATruthBeKnown' about Mayhill Fowler. I get the teeth-gnashing and hair-tearing part; just not the relevance part.

[ATruthBeKnown]

SamThornton,

No "teeth-gnashing and hair-tearing part" issues here. I'm tired of the "old politics" and skulduggery associated with it. After all, they sat on it 4-5 days. Why ?

As a result of poor journalism performance the "collective" is/was in alarm state. But then again some feed on that kind of crap ? Vous? And by the way you don't fool anybody Cnite?

Have a nice day :-)

[ATruthBeKnown]

Jay,

This appears to be a weak attempt to justify your OTB, specifically Mayhill Fowlers article. First, I have no problem with her "being undercover" LOL. What I have a problem with is the failure to allow a target to respond to or verify your "twist". This was further compounded by having sat on it with the headline twist until Friday. Almost every other article was out by Wednesday.

In addition, Ms. Fowler's "citizen journalism" is so far removed from journalism I could heave. It is nothing but an opinionated diary from a writer with somewhat dubious skills. You can and should do better

This is your second attempt to put last Friday's toothpaste back in the tube. Your performance as her "manager" and her performance as a writer is being held by your loyal reader's in question. This being said, until and unless some type of apology is made, things will NOT change. I believe other feel the same.

My recommendation to Ms. Huffington remains the same.

[Bullyness]

No apology needed. There is enough information and links to information on this site to inform a rather studied, fair and thorough opinion. Mayhill Fowler's article is only as significant as we the people allow it to be. Small things to a giant.

[CeciliaBertrand]

I agree - just drop it Jay, you blew it - the 'Mayflower' blew it and we don't want more of the same...Huffington should ban her submissions entotale.

[SamEllison]

Is anybody real?

[sophiej]

Can anybody think?

[Tumult]

Have a problem with a journalist spending 3-4 weeks RESEARCHING a story, then providing INFORMATION? Are you kidding me. If I lived in Philidelphia this would secure my daily patronage.
And is very impressive considering the hatchet jobs people do on the news.
I will take information, rather than distortions of single lines of information based on personal bias or regurgetated talking points.

[95flhtcu]

I for one have no problem with "undercover" stories. I forget the author's name, but I once read a book by a journalist that actually hired into the Department of Corrections in NY and worked at Sing Sing for over a year. That story would have NEVER been told if he went around flashing his press credentials.

[paragrafH]

Two wonderful and revealing articles. Thanks for bringing them to our attention on Huffpo. Read something I hadn't heard before in the comments to the Obama piece: Someone noted that HRC campaign pays people to respond to blogs. I may be the only person who didn't know this, but it sure explains a lot, doesn't it?

[amnd]

I guess you're still trying to explaining/justify OR HIDE that your friend Mayhill Fowler was a mole for the Clintons. This dear over-61-year old (no disrespect here, honestly. She's not that older than me) can spend all that money contributing to different campaigns, travelling from the West to the East Coast just for the love of covering the 08 campaign for OTB, for free. Please
Anyway, we're moving on and winning. The rest is between you and Mayhill. Good luck!!!