A reader writes:
You wrote "I do not understand why the Village cannot handle or absorb this."
The Village cannot handle this because they have been participants in the scam that is Sarah Palin. Whether giving her a pass, lowering the bar for the little con artist, reporting her lies as gospel or flat out lying for her they have been active participants in the con game that is Sarah Palin. What they can't handle or absorb is just how far they went and how low they've sunk. They can't handle themselves. Someday, and it will take awhile for dust to settle and perspective to clear, someone is going to write another book about Palin. Only it won't be about her and the hoax she is. It will be about the hoax that the press turned themselves into on her behalf. It's going to be a really ugly and unforgiving book. And no doubt the press will savage it.
I think that's largely true – proven almost definitively by the Journo-List leaks, where liberal journalists debated the political efficacy of finding out the truth. I remember asking one colleague about Palin's weird pregnancy story when it first emerged. Probably untrue, he said, but not worth looking into because it would hurt "your reputation." Others insisted the actual life of Palin was irrelevant, because her public record was so awful, it was all you needed to focus on. Another writes:
"The Village cannot handle or absorb" the total moral vacuum that is Sarah Palin for one simple reason: they don't care about it. They are no longer journalists but participants in the entertainment business. As individuals, I'm sure they don't take Palin any more seriously than you do. But they all recognize the media phenomenon she is (or was). Their goal is to increase the number of eyeballs watching them and Palin serves that purpose. They know damn well she'll never be president and that her long-extended fifteen minutes of fame will eventually end. But in the meantime, a Palin story may mean their ratings go up a notch and that is truly all they care about.
Just remember that the NYT ran a completely credulous piece on Palin's stories about her pregnancy. You think a NYT staffer, Janet Maslin, would implicitly rebuke her own newspaper for never digging deeper? Or would it be more in her interest to grandstand about "old news" and alleged misogyny?
Sigh. As another leading DC reporter said to me at the time: "Why ask questions she won't answer?" Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the legacy media. Oh, and about that "unattributed crap" cited by so many, including Maslin. When will she dismiss the "Niggerhead" story in the Washington Post? Money quote:
Most of those interviewed requested anonymity because they fear being ostracized or other repercussions in their small community.
So the story is baseless, right?
The Dish 