Now that we’re learning something about Cain’s accusers and how the National Restaurant Association settlements agreements were handled, Politico’s unwillingness to give us specific details in that mega-story of theirs is starting to make some sense, at least to me.
What we’re now discovering is that the facts are much less troubling than what was ginned up in our collective imaginations that were fueled only by Politico’s maddeningly vague allegations and innuendo. So now you have to wonder if the 144 story (and counting) feeding frenzy Politico ’s journOlisted up over the last ten days wasn’t all smoke and mirrors designed to cover up the fact that their original story was nowhere near worthy of the Normandy-like roll out they organized and commanded.
The there just isn’t there.
Jonathan — He Who Targets Private Citizens For His Precious One – Martin and Herman Cain
Do I personally believe Politico intentionally held back certain facts that would’ve subdued the sensationalism their vague innuendo created?
What is it our esteemed journalist class likes to say? I’m just raising questions.
Politico’s playing for keeps in 2012 and the willingness of left-of-center media watchdogs like ProPublica, Howard Kurtz, and now the “Columbia Journalism Review” to question its story and suggest it ease up on the feeding frenzy proves it.