The other day, I poked at the Telegraph’s Toby Harnden for whining about Clinton’s campaign being not as nice to the press as Obama’s. He emailed me wondering why I gave him a slap when I argue for transparency in the press — and besides, it came in a blog — which is a fair point. But I responded: “But in there was an attitude I saw in many reporters’ notebooks and columns and analyses — other nonstories: that the campaigns should be nice to us. Where does that presumption come from? Indeed, isn’t that a little close for comfort? I’m not saying we need to be hostile. . . . But our readers really shouldn’t care about the campaigns’ skills at flacking us and about our inconvenience.” So where’s the line between whining and reporting? I’m not sure. Now I see this video from my colleague at the Guardian, Suzanne Goldenberg, coming up against an Obama wall when she tries to interview campaign supporters at headquarters and at a rally and the campaign flunkies try to stop her. She calls that paranoia. Is that complaining or reporting? You decide.
the link to the video doesn’t work. would love to see it. thanks.
Here you go, Mary: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/video/2008/jan/08/obama
The Obama people come off as controlling and not as fans of the press. But the Guardian’s reporter comes off as a bit of a know-it-all. “Is this your first campaign? … Because I’ve been doing this for a long time, and …” Nobody comes out of the video looking especially good.
“Paranoia,” when used properly, is a medical diagnosis, and a quite drastic one at that. Someone who uses it as a loose insult is almost always overstating the case.