Sweet Savage Froom

Froom Savages his coworkers on the dead-tree side of the WaPo conglomeration today. The occasion is the awarding of the Pulizer Prize for National Reporting to Charlie Savage of the Boston Globe. Which Globe? The Boston Globe. Not, um, the Washington Globe, er we mean Post, which might seem logically more in a position to have picked up on the subject of Savage's reporting: Presidential signing statements.

Charlie Savage of the Boston Globe won the Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting yesterday, "for his revelations that President Bush often used 'signing statements' to assert his controversial right to bypass provisions of new laws."

The stories that won Savage his prize are certainly familiar to White House Watch readers -- and yet worth rereading.

And here's a question White House correspondents should be asking themselves today: How did an investigative reporter at a regional newspaper end up winning an award on their beat?

According to Globe Editor Martin Baron, the answer is: "What Charlie does and the reason he won this richly deserved Pulitzer is because he covered what the White House does, not just what it says."

Another thing to keep in mind: For entirely too long, Savage was a one-man band on this important national story.

Froom, alas, will most likely never win a Pulitzer, not that it wouldn't be deserved, because he works for a .com, not a "real newspaper." A fact the "real newspaper" management fell all over themselves to emphasize back last year when the White Whorse was giving them shit for what he was writing: "too biased" they said, when he wrote truth.

And yet of the Washington-based press Froomkin has been the one to give the issue more attention--as in explanations of what "signing statements" are, why they're important, why they're evil, and most likely unconstitutional--than just about all the others put together.

"All the others put together" is a disgusting image now that I think about it. Andrea Greenspan together with David Gregory? Ugh. Brain bleach and eyeball sandpaper, stat.

Comments

savage was on fresh air today

a repeat from a past show, but doing the 'splainin about those signing statement thingees in plain english so that even a reporter from a 'real' paper could understand. it was devastating. he talked about horror after horror after horror...it was like i was listening to 'corrente's worst of bush' on the air. torture, habeas, geneva convention, military secrecy- all these things and more are covered by the "constitutional interpretation of the president" that is the signing statement.

it's a shame, a stain on the profession of white house journalism, that none of those folks thought to make any hay out of them. a regional "nobody" beat them to it and hard, and what is most interesting about what i heard today: the WH stopped speaking with him after the first phone call he made to get their angle on the series. after that, they repeated a talking point and nothing else when he called. so in other words he got shut out and still did a better job than the WH corps.

i sent an email to my buddy there to ask his perspective on this, because frankly it's rather damning. oh, and savage is writing a book on presidential power during bush. i plan to buy it when it comes out, i hope you all do to.

You can be sure Vinny from the Bronx picked up on Savage's story

... before Brian Williams did (in case he ever took time off from listening to Rush Limbaugh to catch the story at all).

www.vastleft.com

I heard some of the Fresh

I heard some of the Fresh Air interview also. As for the rest of the 'reporters', it's too bad there's no Pulitzer for stenography.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Feed the hamsters...

... that work the wheels that keep the Mighty Corrente servers turning. Help us cover monthly hamster kibble anxiety:

...or provide temporary relief:

Thank you!

I support Americans United for Separation of Church and State.