Read on Twitter
1. Thread on Woodward sitting on the interview.
BC I know a bit about viruses, the differences between book & newspaper writing, mainstream media (MSM) notions of subjectivity/objectivity and militarism, immagonna think through a hypothetical for this mental exercise.
BC I know a bit about viruses, the differences between book & newspaper writing, mainstream media (MSM) notions of subjectivity/objectivity and militarism, immagonna think through a hypothetical for this mental exercise.
2. I do actually believe there is value in writing a scholarly article or a book that takes time & that it's good to get out of the news cycle on a longer temporal horizon, for writers, subjects, editors & readers.
But is doing this "objective"? No. It's subjective.
But is doing this "objective"? No. It's subjective.
3. Woodward is a Washington Post editor, which takes objectivity *seriously*. You may recall how they rained down on the Northwestern Daily for a 2019 *opinion* piece.
It's misleading to say "Democracy dies in darkness," sit on life saving info & tarnish OTHERS as subjective.
It's misleading to say "Democracy dies in darkness," sit on life saving info & tarnish OTHERS as subjective.
4. All editorial calls are subjective. All reporting is subjective.
Woodwards and his (book?) editors made a subjective editorial decision.
Would they do this with EVERY possible news bit?
I don't believe so—which brings me to militarism.
Woodwards and his (book?) editors made a subjective editorial decision.
Would they do this with EVERY possible news bit?
I don't believe so—which brings me to militarism.
5. As @WesleyLowery (WP alum who's had his own tussles w that paper over objectivity), news in Feb that Trump knew the virus could transmit in the air would have saved lives—perhaps many of nearly 200K lost.
Let's think through a military hypothetical. https://twitter.com/WesleyLowery/status/1303841436354347011
Let's think through a military hypothetical. https://twitter.com/WesleyLowery/status/1303841436354347011
6. As many ppl have died of COVID as if 9/11/2001 had happened 60 or 70X.
If Woodward had interviewed a member of Al Qaeda & had on tape plans to kill 200K ppl, would he have published?
I think so.
If he hadn't & 200K Americans were killed, would he be in trouble?
Yup.
If Woodward had interviewed a member of Al Qaeda & had on tape plans to kill 200K ppl, would he have published?
I think so.
If he hadn't & 200K Americans were killed, would he be in trouble?
Yup.
7. The US media tends to think of objectivity as siding with the state. And so, if Woodward had on tape foreign actors planning external harm to the US, I think he would have (& would be expected to) published pressing info to stop death.
8. But bc the threat came from the president of the United States, I believe Woodward didn't choose to publish —and wasn't expected to, and won't face consequences for so doing. In fact, he can still be seen as a serious, objective journalist in the DC tradition.
9. Objectivity is seen as proximity to power, and also as not stepping outside the framework of what Chomsky and Herman called the Propaganda Model of Journalism.
10. Woodward employed the 3rd filter (reliance on official sources) &, in a reverse way, the 5th. The last filter needs a common external enemy (terrorism, communism, immigrants). Woodward didn't have one, he had POTUS—& so the source's words could be sat on even as they killed.
11. It is unimaginable that if Woodward's interview had been from a foreign enemy he would have sat on it or been pilloried if he had. But BC the call came in front of the house.
They made a subjective call. I believe it was the wrong call—but I, of course, ain't objective.
They made a subjective call. I believe it was the wrong call—but I, of course, ain't objective.
12. You see, this wknd, I am going to help spread ashes of a friend who needlessly died of COVID in May.
But what if the President had taken it seriously in Feb?
What is a journalist w access to the POTUS *reported* POTUS privately knew of more danger?
But what if the President had taken it seriously in Feb?
What is a journalist w access to the POTUS *reported* POTUS privately knew of more danger?
13. Could my friend's life have been saved if a journalist w access to POTUS exposed that POTUS knew how deadly & respiratory SARS-CoV-2 was?
Could (m)any of the 200K have been saved
As writers, what are we doing w imminent life saving info, if not to share it?
Could (m)any of the 200K have been saved
As writers, what are we doing w imminent life saving info, if not to share it?
14. The MSM is so quick to defer to military threats & militarism. They will bolster the state in ginning up fears of foreign threats. But here, Woodward did the equivalent of sitting on knowing a foreign air force was on its way, as it bombed the equivalent of 60 or 70 9/11s...
15. ...just 'cuz the hit was ordered from inside the White House.
Woodward et al made an editorial call.
Subjectively, I think it was an immoral call & failed our calling as journalists & writers to inform ppl w important info we discover in a manner timely enuf to help.
Woodward et al made an editorial call.
Subjectively, I think it was an immoral call & failed our calling as journalists & writers to inform ppl w important info we discover in a manner timely enuf to help.
16. h/t to @AdamWeinstein, who points out @mlcalderone reporting my thesis on Woodward and nationalist militarism indeed has a precedent https://twitter.com/mlcalderone/status/1303812718537904128
17. So many of us—billions worldwide—upended our lives over this virus. As w AIDS, ppl took care of one another, engage in mutual care, got creative to find news ways to survive & save as many friends and strangers as we could.
Woodward made a different choice.
Woodward made a different choice.
18. Woodward chose to keep doing what he always did—sit on the scoop to maximize book sales, like a drama queen.
He didn't think anew what this virus might call on him as a writer to do to adapt.
Like much of the ruling class, he felt immune from needing to adapt.
He didn't think anew what this virus might call on him as a writer to do to adapt.
Like much of the ruling class, he felt immune from needing to adapt.
19. You can call his positionality in so doing many things, but you can't call it objective.
Meanwhile, many of us—most of us—adapted to the pandemic in an existential manner, understanding adaptation was a matter of life or death for us, loved ones7 strangers.
Many died.
Meanwhile, many of us—most of us—adapted to the pandemic in an existential manner, understanding adaptation was a matter of life or death for us, loved ones7 strangers.
Many died.
20. So when I think of my dear friend who died, & the five other ppl I knew less well who died, & the funerals (for non-COVID deaths) we couldn't attend, and the depression and sickness so many have endured,
my editorial judgment is that Woodward et all made a very bad call.
my editorial judgment is that Woodward et all made a very bad call.
21. Viruses connect us, in both harmful and extraordinary ways, and it's fascinating—if depressing—to see how they connect the middle and lower classes in ways that change our lives and times of death, while the ruling class carries on like business as usual.
22. I often think of this quote from the director Christopher Nolan, about the word "content," which he and I both can't stand.
Not all info is "content" to plug and play in different scenarios.
Not all info is "content" to plug and play in different scenarios.
23. Our lives are not "content."
Life saving info is not mere "content."
The work we do as writers & journalists is serious. It's not mere fodder for websites or books.
We need to think critically about when & why our practices need to fit the times—ESPECIALLY in a pandemic.
Life saving info is not mere "content."
The work we do as writers & journalists is serious. It's not mere fodder for websites or books.
We need to think critically about when & why our practices need to fit the times—ESPECIALLY in a pandemic.
24. @cmkoeb may be right—Woodward blowing the whistle sooner may not have saved lives.
But so many worldwide grabbed their bucket to try to bail water out as we drowned.
Woodward had a bigger bucket than most journos—and abandoned ship. https://twitter.com/cmkoeb/status/1303877106397523968
But so many worldwide grabbed their bucket to try to bail water out as we drowned.
Woodward had a bigger bucket than most journos—and abandoned ship. https://twitter.com/cmkoeb/status/1303877106397523968
25. I think, if our profession's most resourced practitioners can't be bothered to adapt to practice our calling, it means our profession at large is failing its calling. People trust us with their stories, eyes and ears in need of important, timely info. This was a failure.
26. Touched, and saddened, by how many people are responding to this thread with their own grief. I am starting to understand why it takes decades of generations for ppl to recover from or even acknowledge their grief, if they ever do.
27. As @davidsirota puts it, Woodward and the Washington Post could have had this headline, which may have created a whole different timelines of events. https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/1303842411949355014
28. Anyway, I'm going to go back to listening to my new musical find, Sufjan Stevens, to wind down and go to sleep. Tell your people you love them, and cherish all those friends & strangers who exchanged care with you over the past six months. Goodnight.
