Missing the Point

This passage from the WaPo ombudsman’s defense of Monica Hesse’s lengthy puff piece on professional homophobe Brian Brown is revealing in the way that it fails to address the central issue:

I agree that the story fell short, but not because Hesse was naïve or lacked journalistic diligence. In retracing her reporting, it’s clear the research was extensive. And some details about her personal life seem to belie claims she has a conservative agenda (more on that later).

The problems:

• You know, it would be a real game changer if the phrase “having a(n) x agenda” were thrown under the bus. On steroids! Hopefully the nation’s editors can close the deal.
• Given what we know about certain major Republican politicians, I would be pretty careful about inferring positions on same-sex marriage from the author’s personal sexuality.
• But that’s the minor point. I didn’t assume from the profile that Hesse was, necessarily, personally against same-sex marriage. And I actually agree with conservatives that on these kinds of social issues journalists are likely to have nominal positions on the issues more liberal than the population as a whole, although I think that they tend to be liberals of the “I wish the world were a better place as long as I don’t have to do anything and it doesn’t affect me in any way or make anybody too upset” variety. But what this story reveals, taking assumptions about Hesse’s politics at face value, is how little a reporter’s personal politics matter. (The story, as Alexander essentially admits, was seriously deficient whether Hesse had an “agenda” or not.) Polls showing the x percentage of reporters vote Democratic don’t, in themselves, mean anything, because someone who voted for Obama is just as capable of writing a puff-piece about a major right-winger if their editors approve. Just as a reporter’s personal opposition to corporate malfeasance doesn’t mean very much if writing stories critical of a newspaper’s advertisers will get you fired.
  

[Via]