Let that woman go. She is a man-hating, husband-bashing, shrew. She embarrases WaPo.

Further, the Red State blog is a debacle. It's assanine fraty-boy level muckracking command from repub's HQ.

Clarification:

Post above refers to Leslie Morgan Steiner. She berated her own husband in her blog AND that of a friend in another post.

Red State refers to the blog by Ben Demenech (sp?). He is known for racist comments about black leadership and literal interpretation of the bible.

Both are designed to stir the pot. Both generated enormous negative commentary.

Caroline Little, you are responsible for this content. Do something about it. Or you will lose those precious awards (not to mention your readers).

Hi,

I was wondering if the someone at the Washington Post is going to provide any more insight into the creation of this Red America blog. Specifically, answering these questions would be a good start:

Who made to decision to start Red America? Why was it started?

Will the post consider hiring a liberal progressive blogger? If not, why?

I thought one of the lessons regarding the last time comments were pulled from the Post is that your silence was a large part of the problem.

If you don't plan on answering these questions, fine, just let us know that you won't be answering them. If you do plan on answering them, please let us know when and where.

Thanks

it has become apparent that Ben Domenech has posted on the web blog Red State under the pseudonym Augustine.
On the day of Coretta Scott King's funeral, he wrote, "The President visits the funeral of a Communist. And phones in a message to the March for Life. I think we can get a little pissed about this."

Do you stand by these statements?
Could you please ask Ben Domenech to clarify why he felt it appropriate to call a revered civil rights leader a communist?

Thanks.

Hi,

I was wondering when you wrote that "This is the first in a series of periodic conversations" if you plan on actually responding to readers here? Will you be answering their questions and actually be conversing with them?

Thanks.

If this is a conversation, then why aren't your editors deep in the fray of the 500+ comments on the last post on the Red State blog?

BTW, I think the Post's creation of the Red State blog was a capitulation to the right's unending criticism of good journalism, and that it is a decision you will come to regret, if you have not already.

I do think that the major current flaw of the comments sections of most post blogs is the lack of interactivity on the parts of the editors in question.

Most websites tend to react on the fly to comments. With 500+ on the last thread, that's tough to do, but even one or two comments from the the powers that be might be welcome. What do you think?

Dayum, the lefties are all in a twist. On Balance catches it? Such a harmless little blog. But I guess Red America has gotten them all fired up. Funny how their reasoning works; cancel the print subscription because of something the free, separate entity did. Isn't that like punching the kid you can reach because you can't get near the guy who actually did you wrong?

I'd like to know what criteria the Washington Post used to decide which blogger to choose. From what I've read, the blogger they did choose has absolutely nothing by way of education, experience or ability to reason and write. I can't figure out for the life of me why Ben Domenech? Was the WaPo paid to hire him?

dear Ms. Little.

Go read the 400 plus comments on the "post.blog" thread on the creation of the "Red America" blog....

then explain to serious journalism consumers why the WPNI should not be considered a bad joke with lots of high tech bells and whistles attached....

it doesn't really matter how many awards you win for "design" --- its "content" that counts, and washingtonpost.com is flushing itself down the toilet with crap like Red America.

On your new "blog," Red America:

I would like to congratulate you, recommend Ann Coulter for the position of omsbudsman, and help you bid a fond farewell to the reality-based community.

Sig heil!

Red America is not Red America. It's elite Republicanism. It's white insider-ism. It's nepotism. And ChickenHawk-ism. Frankly, it's offensive.

And I don't see how this will help you win readers. There are NO POSITIVE COMMENTS so far. Read through it yourself.

Going back to December, John Harris and Deb Howell started a campaign to pigeonhole Dan Froomkin as a 'heavily-opinionated' liberal, under documented pressure not from real readers, but fake readers, in the guise of White House operative Patrick Ruffini.

It took barely 90 days for the Post to realize its goal of 'conservative balance,' which means for each and every journalist, there must be a partisan conservative voice to represent the 'opposing viewpoint.'

Milbank is experienced and not a liberal. Froomkin is exquisitely qualified a journalist and not a liberal.

If this is really a 'conversation,' and not an effort to draw eyeballs or punt a real discussion down the field, then can you please explain to the readers why an inexperienced non-journalist raised in urban environs and educated in oldline institutions has been chosen to represent something called 'Red America?' Mr. Domenech's pedigree looks more like that of a Country Club Republican (child of politcal operative, one mixed up in the Abramoff scandal, no less; drifting through life on political and family connections) than that of a true middle America 'red stater.'

In his first posts, he insults the very medium that now pays him, as well as, if polls are correct, the majority of Americans with legitimate questions about the president's leadership.

Further, he uses language that seems eerily reminiscent of the kind of inconsiderate and counterproductive language that caused the Post.com to disable commenting capabilities in January over Deb Howell's inaccurate assessment that Abramoff had directed money to Ds as well as Rs.

Putting this guy on Post letterhead is not a trivial matter. He's a racist and his intention is not to put forth conservative viewpoints objectively for real discussion. His intention is to widen the divide that has afflicted our country the past 5 years.

You can do better.

Boy, Brady and the gang that couldn't report straight just don't get it, do they? Talk about repeating the same mistakes...

Look, Ms Little, allow me to help you. When you have another rebellion of the peons (aka, "readers") on your hands, it is time to address the reader complaints. It is not the time to pop up a post talking about how swell you are and how many awards you have gotten.

And most assuredly it is not the time to declare a committment to interactivity when while you studiously avoid resonding to the complaints.

Web 101. Actually, this is PR 101 which preceeds the web, but why make a big deal of that?

Hi,

It seems like you won't actually be conversing with readers here (your description of this post as a "conversation" seems to be rhetoric at this point). Does anyone from the Post editorial staff or higher actually read these comments or are you wasting everyone's time here?

Thanks.

Lissen to all the winey libs. Your all just afraid because Bens' going to bring the house every day! Your afraid to here the truth so just keep puting your fingers in your ears and yeling "I cant' here you!" as loud as you can! Your afraid of an onest debate because you just dont' have the brains to mach up with one of teh sharpest brians on the right! Id' feel sorry for you if I didnt' hate you so much.

People, People, calm down

I just heard that Ben Domenech has enlisted to go to Iraq

I am disappointed in your new Red America column. I believe the credibility of your newspaper has been compromised. You have always been known as the breaking open of "Watergate" newspaper. Although your investigative reporting has been less than stellar of late, I am appalled you are now compromising the integrity of your paper by hiring a far right politician like Ben Domenech to pen such a column. Not only does he not represent most Americans, he does not represent your newspaper.What could you be thinking?

This is such a bad idea it renders me speechless. WaPo should have standards higher than this. I'm going to cancel my subscription.

It's a sad day :(

I'm probably in the minority here, but I applaud the addition of a conservative blogger to balance out Froomkin and Milbank online. Will you also be adding a column in the Front Page section to balance out Milbank's liberal print column as well?

It's fine to hire a conservative blogger for your online paper. Preferably an experienced and accomplished thinker and writer who is capable of challenging readers across the political spectrum. But this young, callow Ben? This smirking jerk? What are his qualifications? Why should the Post choose him, of all people?

Perhaps I ought to ask a more pointed question: Who is he related to on your staff? Because if this isn't a case of nepotism, then I can't account for it.

I am appalled to read Red America, which reads like a load of bile. This doesn't balance a rabid left wing rant, because there isn't one in the Post, nor should there be. It is the same phenomena of right wing pundits being paired with mainstream journalists for 'balance' on Sunday interview shows. This is disgraceful and a threat to journalistic integrity. For shame!

On a side note, Mr. Domenech could not have asked for a better start publicitywise. Just about every major blog, both on the left and right, provided a link to his site. In a few short days, Domenech probably just became the most visited blog on Washington Post.com.

Congrats Ben.

Red America? I didn't realize we were fighting communism again. Oh my, we all seem so consumed fighting this "war" on terrorism and we don't seem to be having much success. Doesn't seem like we need any more enemies.

I would like to congratulate the Washington Post on its many awards and technical prowess in moving to the web. Technically you are doing a great job.

In terms of editorial judgement I agree with over 98% of the recent reader comments... you suck.

I think we need to find more common ground, rather than just reinforcing our differences. I think the Red State blog is a step toward further division and not an advance.
Can't we all just get along? If not, can't we all just express our opinions in the same place? Does everyone really need a place where they will get 100% agreement? (If so, you sure didn't grow up in my family, but you're part of my American family regardless.)

Yes, Ms. Little, to echo some of the comments above, it's not a conversation if you're not actually responding to what the readers have to say.

I'd like to hear why, at a time when you are cutting newsroom jobs, you decide to bring a hack like Red States Domenech on staff?

"But before the Web, your opinion about the news was limited to your immediate sphere of influence -- coworkers, friends, family."

Ms. Little, I appreciate every WaPo staffer writing to the readers. But, sadly, this still isn't a dialogue, but a one way street. Great, we can post our opinions. So what? Even if the majority of the readers has righteous complains, your company tends to ignore them. The responses in the discussions about Froomkin and the Abramoff funds were late, objectionable and unsatisfactory.

Do you think the majority opinion on new blogger Domenech will finally lead to a decision that will satisfy the readers?

"But before the Web, your opinion about the news was limited to your immediate sphere of influence -- coworkers, friends, family."

Ms. Little, I appreciate every WaPo staffer writing to the readers. But, sadly, this still isn't a dialogue, but a one way street. Great, we can post our opinions. So what? Even if the majority of the readers has righteous complains, your company tends to ignore them. The responses in the last big discussions were late, objectionable and unsatisfactory.

Do you think the majority opinion on new blogger Domenech will finally lead to a decision that will satisfy the readers?

I just have to laugh at liberals who are getting this worked up over The Washington Post hiring a conservative. Seriously, they have just about every other opinion columnist at this paper (Froomkon, Milbank, Fisher, Malloy, etc...) as well as I am sure a majority of the so-called objective reporters at this paper on their side. Yet the prescence of one single conservative somehow makes The Washington Post a mouthpice of the GOP.

Ben Domenech must be proud to know how much power he has....

Wtf is the problem with this ridiculous comment filter? This is really annoying!

Jonas, now what would you call Krauthammer, a pinky commie???

I believe the term is PINKO commie.

Okay, now we are up to two conservatives. I'll even thrown in George Will to make three. That three conservatives against the entire reporting staff of The Washington post along with the likes of Froomkin, Milbank, Malloy, Fisher.

Ms. Little,

The web is indeed a new medium with different rules than print media. One of the main differences is that it makes Top-Down control of public opinion much more difficult. While publications used to have the choice of ignoring reader feedback, blogs and the web create self-reinforcing "swarms" of feedback.

These swarms cannot be controlled or silenced. Smart online companies will learn to respond to and engage with the swarms. Trying to swat down a swarm of wasps is a losing proposition.

It's a new model that is understandably scary to Old Media companies. But it shouldn't be. Bloggers are not insects, they are real people with real lives and jobs who have real opinions (I refer you to Blogads.com's 2005 reader survey). They are US Citizens. Don't be afraid of them. We're supposed do be a Democracy after all, no?

You wrote:

"But before the Web, your opinion about the news was limited to your immediate sphere of influence -- coworkers, friends, family."

That is very perceptive of you. But there is another cognitive aspect to the web, that pertains especially to "open comments" like what you have here, but which I suspect will be once again shut down because of the Domenech uproar.

With open comments, not only will the WaPo staff be able to see the comments, but also anyone else in the world who visits this page.

This is very different from "mailing a letter to the editor". The only people who are aware of the complaint or comment are you (your immediate sphere of influence) and the editor who has the ultimate choice not to share your comment with the rest of the readership.

Therein lies the difference.

Jonas, you don't read the Post regularly, right? What about Samuelson? Nobody has ever called him a liberal. And there are many columnists that really aren't left wing, but middle-of-the-road, like Ignatius, for instance. And don't forget all those guest writers, like Cheney. Hell, AP just fired an editor for publishing a Dem senator's column, but here it seems to be ok that WaPo editors are doing the job for the GOP. Where exactly is that liberal bias? That's just right wing brouhaha.

Again, you're making the same mistakes all over.

What do you folks think is going to happen here? You've had 24 hours to write up a response on the groundswell agains Benny Boy.

Instead you insult the readers by posting a "rah-rah, we're so great" item by Ms. Little. On top of that, she insults everyone's intelligence by claiming a "conversation".

You now have well over 800 commenters and rising, and you insult their intelligence or hide. Sound familiar? Sort of like last time with Lovey Howell?

Look kidz...how many times do we have to tell you? Interactivity means you have to interact. And a groundswell of anger from your readers means a fast response is in order. Sending Ms. Little to inform us how fab you all are will just get readers angrier.

You need an official response yesterday. Not this pap.

Gray,

I guess I can;t figure out why having a conservative voice to balance out Dana Milbank and Dan Froomkin is so bad. Would you at least agree that there should at least be a daily column to counteract the constant anti-Bush rhetoric coming from Milbank and Froomkin? Seems to me you are suggesting only liberals should have columns.

This needs to be said again:

Interactivity means you have to interact. And a groundswell of anger from your readers means a fast response is in order. Sending Ms. Little to inform us how fab you all are will just get readers angrier.

You need an official response yesterday. Not this pap.

Jonas,

The balance to Froomkin and Milbank would be an intelligent conservative ywho can actually back up his comments with sourcing. Froomkin literally lists out around 50 cources he comments on in each column.

But a mouth breathing bloviator doth not equal that.

Moreover, neither Froomkin nor Milbank are pure ideologues and party hacks. Not are they far on any political spectrum.

The equivalent would be me demanding "balance" for Ceci Connelly and Lovey Howell by insisting the Post give Kusinich a blog to push his ideas.

You don't balance center-right or center-left by loading up a twitching ideologue.

Dear Ms Little,
I'm sure you are way above reading any responses to your article, as of course only you and co-horts have the answer and solution to everything. Just in case you might read it or your many assistants might report to you, I would like to let you now how incredidble hypocritical it is of you to write this article and already in advance warn the reader that their responses are completely irrelevant. All you seem to care about is bragging about these useless awards and how they will look in your office. You don't care about your readers, you despise them, because you hate that they actually have an opinion and want to let you know. The 'sick' group of people that surrounds you and advise you are more important than the readers that made you what you are. These readers will leave you in drones when they become aware how insignificant they are in the WAPO corporate structure and the complete disregard you have for them in the whole process, which is of course all about money and influence in Washington. You don't really care what the newspaper used to stand for, you and your buddy's power grab will be the death for the paper, which of course you don't care for as long as you all will make lots of money when you have to sell.
You are drifting dangerously close to the very dark side of playing the game to win at all costs.
Jandebont

Jonas,

As a real conservative, one who is disgusted with George Bush & Co., I really like smart conservative columns. I think conservatism needs a clear, sharp voice to argue its worldview and lift its rhetoric above the dumbed-down Fox News style that characterizes conservative discourse. The problem with "Red America" is that it perpetuates every negative stereotype about conservatives, and it prolongs the ridiculousness of the debate. Oh, and the child who writes it is not a journalist, although this is ostensibly a news outlet; and further, he was until recently employed by the very administration still in power. The complainers, I have to say, are correct here, until the left is represented at the Post by an unqualified, highly partisan activist prone to whiny rants. (And come on, most of the supposed "liberals" you cite are Bush apologists; Froomkin does challenge the administration, but then again, so do I -- and I'm far from liberal.)

I am impressed with your awards and sincerely applaud WP.com's efforts to become more interactive. It is a direction that all major newspapers will have to go eventually. And surely there will be a bit of a learning curve.

That said, I am really surprised to see the total lack of response here. The Howell fiasco developed because a simple factual error was allowed to go unaddressed even after hundreds of reasonable comments. As people felt ignored they got more angry and hostile. When howell finally responded she was disdainful and dismissive and the factual error has to this day not been corrected. That was a real mess, but fine, it was the first major firestorm that the Post faced and should have been a learning experience. Instead you are doing it all again.

If you really want to embrace interactivity, please open real dialogues with readers. I have felt dismissed by Post staffers even for simple questions like the sometimes-difficult-to-navigate layout of WP.com. On the other hand, the daily politics discussions are interactive and for the most part beyond the call of duty in terms of respect. Maybe they should be the model for other parts of the site.

The decision to hire Domenech is a bad one for far more reasons than simply because he is conservative. He is an avowed partisan political operative with a record of very hateful rhetoric, apparently for the sole purpose of furthering political division. This is very different than the perceived liberal bias by some of the Posts other columnists who are rational and credentialed journalists seeking to further understanding, even if with a certain perspective.

Given the current political situation - the GOP controls all three branches of governement, the president's approval is in the mid-30s and the VP is in the teens, most of the major policy initiatives of the past five years have been disastorous - it is only natural that there should be a glut of negative lines written about the administration and Republican party. To balance this by adding an conservative operative simply to balance the number of nice and bad things said about the GOP is simply idiotic. It means balancing honest reporting with rhetoric.

Seriously washingtonpost.com, this is just silly. Please address our concerns in one way or another. And for the print Washington Post, just because you are technically a different entity, don't think that you are not associated with the hate speech over at Red America. This is a tarnish on your pages as well.

Dear Caroline Little,

you forgot to mention the most important award the WaPo has received recently:

The Best Lapdog award from the hatemonger right. A statue of a gold-plated chickenhawk, with a cluster of Rush Limbaugh's warts.

While I am a bit shocked to find the new opinion blog "Red America" (I consider WP to be just a bit right of the NYT), I applaud your efforts to reach out and broaden your appeal, even though I consider it strictly a business/economic and decision. After all, listening to your customers is probably a wise decision. Thanks...

They reaklly listen allright. The response has been deafening in it's absence.

Pay no attention to the elephant in the room.

Has everyone at the Post lost their marbles?

Carolin, there are hundreds of people already trying to have a 'conversation' with you. The problem is that you're nor responding.

The Washington Post's drift to the hard-right is disturbing, and the drift towards mediocre journalism and mediocre writing maybe even more so.

Just answer the questions: why was Domenech chosen? Were you aware of his racist pronouncements? Were you aware of his family connections to Jack Abramof?

From the pro-war editorials (opposed by a plurality of the American public when you wrote them), to Jim 'I have a shrine to Bush in my home office' VandeHei, to Jim Brady, to Deborah Howell, to Deborah 'Karl Rove's stenographer' Schmidt, to old Nixon/Ford hand Ron Nessen, etc., etc., we're getting to the point where it's hard to tell the Washington Post and the Washington Times apart.

Why won't someone from the Washington Post respond to any of the comments here? Why does the publisher write that this is a conversation and then refuse to take part in any kind of dialogue?

Maybe hiring a stereotypical smear-mongering right-wing blogger is WaPo's joke on their conservative critics. He'll be an easy target. It's like local newspapers in the South who choose the least persuasive of the nationally syndicated liberal columnists to 'balance' their conservative editorial pages. But it's still bad judgement.

I was excited to see that there was a "Comment from the Publisher" post up this afternoon, since it seemed likely the publisher would want to address the outrage about the hiring of little Ben.

Apparently not, though. We know about these awards, Ms. Little, we read about them when you were awarded them. The comment you need to make is why you have hired a racist hate-monger (there is simply no other description) who recently worked for the current regime and whose father is tied to its most corrupt parts.

Please continue your adventure in interactivity by actually interacting with your readers on the topic they are most concerned about: the steady debasement of an incredibly important institution. I have written letters to the ombudsman, the executive editor, and Jim Brady. All I have received is a response from Jennifer that referred me to the Post blog, where I may leave a comment. I have done so, as have many others, but still no interactivity.

There has been no explanation of Ben's hiring. One is overdue. Please get to it. Right away. If you are unable to clearly articulate the reasons for his selection, perhaps Mr. Brady or Mr. Graham can do so.

Thank you.

This may be the problem:

"Little joined WPNI in 1997 as general counsel. She was promoted to vice president, administration and general counsel, in 1998. She became senior vice president of business affairs and general counsel in 1999, then assumed the roles of chief operating officer in 2000 and president in 2003. In January 2004 she was promoted to CEO and publisher.

someone else posted this....

"This may be the problem: 'Little joined WPNI in 1997 as general counsel.....' "

BINGO!!!!

and you deserve credit for finding this, so please post your name (unless you really want anonymity) because I really want to post this around.

Caroline Little isn't a journalist, or even close to a journalist. She's a complete and utter corporate hack who (obviously) doesn't give a flying fig about journalism, let alone transparency and interactivity. She's a freaking LAWYER --- and now she's the person telling people like Brady to keep their mouth shut, because the less the Post admits, the better its legal position will be.

Lets face it, Ben D. is perfectly capable of committing libel --- and as a lawyer Caroline Little needs to minimize WPNI's exposure. That means not admitting what over 800 people have already pointed out -- that Ben D. is purely and simply a partisan hack who is completely unqualified to be blogging for washingtonpost.com. Little has two choices --- admit WPNI made a mistake and fire Domenech (and piss off Post big shots like Harris, Howell, and Downie), or order Brady and the rest of the WPNI staff to say absolutely nothing in response to all the valid criticism that the post has received.

Right now, silence is all about damage control for Little....

Sigh. The repeat of the Howell "run away" behavior just demonstrates for sure what we all thought about Brady and gang.

Cowards.

Apparently the Post has decided that the American people, and particularly all those millions in the "Red" States, only respond positively to rants, namecalling, and bullying recitation of memorized cliches.

It's rather naive to believe that such nonsense represents any of the "forgotten" out here in the heartland. Somewhere along the line, our media has decided that interrupting others and ideological fits are an appropriate substitute for meaningful dialogue. Meanwhile, nothing is accomplished to tackle the myriad of problems in this nation, and there is no real discussion left in the press.

can you please be a little more up-to-date with your links in the drop-down menu on the front page of your website to access blogs, etc.? the link for the post.blog takes us to the old URL, even though it says the URL changed on february 17th. that's over a month. isn't there someone at washingtonpost.com who can keep up on things like that?

The let that guy go so they could afford Benny.

hey, i need a job

i can type and stuff

i think the war is awesome, but i'd rather blog

so, can i have it?

-dave

Ms. Little:

You wrote:

"This is the first in a series of periodic conversations I'll be starting with our readers. Perhaps regularly. More likely, I'll write when I have something interesting to say. (Or at least when I think I have something interesting to say.)"

[Jim Brady said the same thing in his introduction to the blog, responded rarely and only to attack any blogger with the fortitude to question Deborah Howell's erroneous column of two months ago, and then dropped out of sight.]

"It is somewhat unusual to hear from the publisher of an editorial Web site. But so much about the Web, and Web news in particular -- and even Web advertising -- is different and unusual that I thought it was time to give you a greater sense of how we approach some of that "newness" and hear your opinions on the subject, as well."

[You bet it is unusual! What happened to old Jim? Is this 'newness' anything like that "truthiness" that Old Jim fostered on the previous blog?]

"What sparked this note is the fact that washingtonpost.com, in recent months, been the recipient of a number of exciting awards."

[What really sparked your note was an attempt to limit the damage of Old Jim's hiring of Ben Domenech and 2) Old Jim's botching of the previous blog operation and his unwillingnes to get back on again.]

"In January, we won 31 of the 90 video awards given to television and multimedia journalists by the White House News Photographers Association. Just recently, at the Newspaper Association of America's Digital Edge Awards, we were recognized for Best Overall News Site, Best Entertainment Site, Best Employment Strategy and Best Automotive Strategy."

[That was then, this is now!]

"The awards say much about what kind of investment we have put into building not only a great news site, but also one that serves the needs of our audience in other facets of their lives as well."

[More grist for the bulls--t mill.]

"The last couple of years have marked a turning point of sorts for news on the Web. I'll offer an analogy to explain what I mean.

When moving film first developed, early filmmakers relied heavily on the techniques of still photography to inform their work. And they told stories primarily the same way they were told in live theater, just on film. Later, as directors became more comfortable with moving images and developed new tools and nuances, film quickly became a unique medium in its own right, with a language, reach and power all its own.

With the advent of television, much the same transition occurred. With new technology, new tools and techniques were developed to tell stories.

The Web is now experiencing that same shift. Where online news was once simply print or TV on the Web, it has become so much more than that. Online news has rapidly come of age, with the ability to tell stories and share information and reach people at any time of the day unlike any other medium.

That maturity has also been noticed on the business side, with major advertisers increasingly moving greater percentages of marketing budgets to online advertising.

Along with other forms of media, the Web offers another compelling choice for accessing information. The goal of washingtonpost.com has been to make it even more compelling.

For most of 2005, that's what we spent most of our time and energy doing. In the last half of the year, we became the first major newspaper site to launch a host of editorial and business innovations.

Understanding that our national, international and local audiences have different needs and priorities, we launched unique home pages targeted to location. With Technorati we opened up our news pages to bloggers, allowing you to see who's saying what about issues around the globe. We launched a new Opinions page, a revised and updated City Guide, more than 30 blogs on a range of issues and a Congressional Votes Database that allows voters to easily keep track of the decisions made on their behalf. One of the most recent blogs, On Balance by Leslie Morgan Steiner, has generated a lot of discussion around work and life balance, an area that many of us who are juggling raising a family and working understand. More recently, we have added Del.icio.us "tags" to our articles, a service that lets you bookmark individual articles for sharing and future reference.

News has never existed in a vacuum. But before the Web, your opinion about the news was limited to your immediate sphere of influence -- coworkers, friends, family. Now with the tools that we offer on washingtonpost.com, that sphere can include the reporter, the editor, the newsmakers and in a very real sense, people in nearly every nation around the world.

What we have planned in 2006 will take that concept even further, with a focus on innovations that will increase the utility of news and information on the Web as a tool for daily living, with greater integration of our award-winning multimedia, and provide more effective ways to communicate your views and the views of others to a broader audience.

I think it will be exciting. I look forward to hearing what you have to say.

Caroline Little
CEO & Publisher, Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive"

Why not get on here now and answer the questions being raised by your readers?]

"It is somewhat unusual to hear from the publisher of an editorial Web site... I thought it was time to give you a greater sense of how we approach some of that "newness" and hear your opinions on the subject, as well."

Here's my opinion, how about taking part in the "conversation" that you started?

I don't know which is worse: logging onto the Post website, which is free but features ads showing exotic open-mouthed models heaving their breasts towards me (the elderly mastectomy survivor) OR logging onto the NYTimes site only to find that everything I want to read, I'm expected to pay for. I would really, really appreciate your getting some sponsors who aren't using sex to sell their products. Couldn't you talk up the site to the National Artichoke Association?

I'm not really sure if this blog can go on without acknowledging the elephant in the room. His name is Ben Domenech, and he's the last person that the Washington Post should have any association with, much less hire to write a column.

Why the Post would associate with someone who says things about their staff like the following is incomprehensible:

"I just have this specific and deep-rooted dislike for everything Dan Froomkin says and does. He's one of the dozen or so people in the world that I just detest - along with Noam Chomsky, Eric Alterman, Louis Farrakhan, Barbra Streisand, Kate Michelman, Mitch Albom, Michael Irvin, David Duke, Peter Singer, and Rick Reilly."

Good grief! The wingnuts have managed to sabotage a respectable newspaper and morph a serious political forum into ranting and name-calling. Now all of us are so distracted we can't think straight. Is this a conspiracy, or what?

How does a boy who grew up in Washington, DC all his life, home-schooled and deeply sheltered in a family of vast priviledge and great influence, represent heartland America?

It doesn't get any more elite than a white boy whose father is a high-level Republican operative, and best pals with Jack Abramoff himself.

A boy who, thanks to his family connections, got handed a job in the white house with no qualifications.

Ben Domenech doesn't represent 'red America'. He represents the Washington, DC-based hard-right Republican elite -- the same people who are now taking over the Washington Post and destroying the great institution that Katherine Graham left us.

He also happens to be a racist who called Coreta King a communist on the day of her funeral, and who called 'some members' of the Judicial branch worse than the KKK -- and much, much more, as you could have found out with 15 minutes of due diligence.

But, even without any due diligence, you must have known that his writing skills are abismal.

Is there anything left, anything at all left in Washington that doesn't operate on cronyism and nepotism?

I'll just say this, if the left would spend just 10% of the time they spend worrying about a single blogger at The Washington Post, they might actually win an election once in a while....

Is the WP trying to compete with Limbaugh, O'Reilly, or the New York Post?

If the WP felt the need to have a conservative blog on its site, it could at the very least have chosen some intellectually challenging and intelligent blogger to promote a healthy debate.

Instead, the WP settled for intellectual mediocrity, shrillness, and hate-spewing, by hiring an infantile 24-year-old with no journalistic skills, but a long track record of addled-brained viciousness, to provide "balance".

It is official! The WP has now become a pathetic rag. Congratulations!

Your newspaper has given in to the intellectual mediocrity that the Bush crowd has been promoting for the past five years.

Your subscription revenues are definitely going to take a hit. As for your advertising revenues, rest assured that they are going to melt like snow in the sun as intelligent and intellectually curious people put pressure on advertisers to dissociate themselves from a publication that has now become putrid.

Dear Fred: Your GOP nazi friends couldn't win a single election without cheating via Diebold machines. Please go fight in your master's war, and preferably come back in a ziploc.

I write with sadness, for the newspaper you represent as a public person has forsaken its moral duty to a public ethic and the public politic. “Red America” written by Ben Domenech is a column that has no resolve other than to diminish all other credible writing published in your newspaper. Its very existence alongside side of your other writers diminishes your renown.
A renown just recently making a comeback alongside other papers. Papers who in today’s world must show a profit line above 20% net and are found to be doing it by catering to the lowest denominator of Joe Pyne journalism and speaking of that type of unsubstantiated verbiage refer only to G. Bush in his latest attempt at “strawmanship”. You will pay a heavier price in international and national credibility, and canceled subscriptions will not be the proof! The proof will lie in the scholarly works devoted to debasing your credibility and they will be read as time unfolds by a public increasing wary of unethical behavior.
I ask only that you hire scribes who at least do some fact checking and have something to add to the discussion warranted today, namely the daily attack on a future.

I gave up on the post months ago when I realized you were incapable of analysis and asking hard questions of this administration and the Republican controlled government policies all of which have devastated this country and dismantled a perfectly good democracy.

But, curious about this much hyped new Red blogger, I decided to look into the infant analyzer. The Post should be ashamed of posting his writing. My disenchantment with your paper has turned to disgust. Please give up the pretense of "fair and balanced" since you have followed Fox New's definition of it. Orwell, a man of integrety, thoughful analysis, and reflection would be saddened by the upside down definitions that pemeate the Washington Post these days.

Good-bye Washington Post.

Hi,

Yesterday a pundit at a flagship conservative magazine emailed me and claimed that he was paid $50.00 for each article and zip for blogging in their online forum. Fifty US dollars. If I wished to be snide, I could say the magazine should ask for $45 back. But that's not the point.

Reading Ben's pointed reminder that he occupies the same space as Pulitzer Prize winner George Will forced my realize I've been wasting my time reading the Washington Post first when I log on. I can take the pro-Bush slant, the bizarre claims of Jim Hoagland and Charles Krauthammer. Their opinions are born of reason and research.

The result is that I'll likely cancel my subscription to TNR, drop the WP completely, go back to the LA times and sign up for Times Select. I've read the WP online for ten years. That part is over.

I don't mind paying to be informed and I'd rather pay for quality than indulge Ben and his bosses Jim and Fred. I'll drop by periodically, although right now I can't imagine why.

My day is now complete - I have been called a Nazi.

The Red America decision for me was the last straw! I do not even care to debate it with you; however, I will say my subscription to the Post has already be cancelled.

No Fred, your friends were called that. You were called a chickenhawk coward.

I'm embarrassed for and by the Post.

The Washington Post, both paper and online, can just forget about preserving its credibility. The hiring of Ben Domenech is just the latest in the Post's transformation into another Fox News.

I'd like to ask Ms. Little this question posted on another blog:

"How symbolic is it that "Red America" is to be represented by a twentyfour year old homeschooled self-described superior intellect, whose primary contribution to humanity, aside from being too cowardly to fight in his much-vaunted war but not too cowardly to make a few quick bucks off the names of people who weren't, has been the advantages of constant nepotism from his very well connected Republican father?"

Are these values that the Washington Post supports?

Deb Howells actual comment was that Abramoff had given money to both R's and D's. That was inaccurate. He did,however, direct money to both D's and R's. That would be an accurate statement.

My apologies for misreading what you meant.

I guess calling people "Nazis" and "Chickenhawks Cowards" is part of this "reasoned and sensible debate" the left wants to have....

So what is the lesson here?

Opinions count as qualifications, so long as they are loud and shrill enough.

Professional journalists must be "balanced" by hacks.

The mindless political divide (right/left, blue/red) continues unabated, with the Post only serving to reinforce these simplistic definitions.

Thanks, but no thanks.

Ms. Little, the blog feedback has been down for half a day, allegedly because of a bandwith limit. This is one of those things that really shouldn't happen at a major interactive service.
Who made the decision to host this section at an obscure californian company called IHNetworks.net, which isn't even competent to build a proper website for their own business?
Do we really have to believe that such a level of incompetence may coincidentally happen at washingtonpost.com?

Giving Ben Domenech the honor of preaching to neo-cons who are ruining America and Iraq...next the world, is an ass in the face of your intelligent readers. Please don't empower hawks and oligarchs.

Mr. Domenech got this gig because his father is a close confidant of Jack Abramoff, something the Neocon hacks at the WaPo, esp. Howard Kurtz, have every intention of covering up.

Continuing, Domenech's father was actually the Bag Man for Tom DeLay's illegal corporate contributions, the ones DeLay is under indictment for. Domenech actually laundered the money.

Stuff you can't make up.

Of course, since Kurtz is a shadow Republican operative, none of this will ever see the light of his column.

Almost 24 hours later, almost 500 comments later, and I believe Ms. Little has yet to grace us with any replies.

This is a "conversation" like Joycelyne Elders' favorite word is sex.

Why would she respond? Think of all the free hits at the website The Washington Post is getting by NOT responding?

Liberals are actually helping The Washington Post make more money since now they can charge advertisers more money due to the increase in traffic.

Ms. Little might be a publisher of a website, but it sure isn't interactive and this sure isn't a conversation. Ms. Little, how about you stop talking down to your readers and show them some respect by responding?

"I guess calling people "Nazis" and "Chickenhawks Cowards" is part of this "reasoned and sensible debate" the left wants to have...."

You mean the "reasoned and sensible debate" like Mouthy Child Ben's blog post in which he whined about Dems and the "unhinged elements of their base, motivated by partisan rage, Michael Moore conspiracies"?

If you can't take it, Righty, don't dish it out.

Also, if you support the war, go fight it. If you don't, you're a chickenhawk coward.

Stick:
"Deb Howells actual comment was that Abramoff had given money to both R's and D's. That was inaccurate. He did,however, direct money to both D's and R's. That would be an accurate statement"

Wrong. There is no evidence to support that Abramoff, through any of his channels, directed any money at all go to Dems. Nearly all of his Indian clients were givers to both parties and elected officials prior to Abramoff's association with said clients.

In fact, a commissioned analysis by a non-partisan research firm shows that the amount given to Dems in the Abramoff period DROPPED by 9% while contributions to Re's WENT UP by 135%. In the same period of Abramoff's influence, those tribes affiliated with Abramoff gave twice as much to Re's as Dems, and those tribes NOT affiliated with Abramoff gave twice as much to Dems as Re's, which is an opposite pattern.

To posit that Abramoff 'directed' (in this sense, influenced the choice of who to give to and how much to give) contributions to Dems as well as Re's simply because there exists a document previously in Abramoff possession that includes line items designating contributions to both parties is specious at best, intentionally misleading at worst.

My take is that, if he could have, he would have 'directed' giving to Dems drop to ZERO, but the tribes, racially depicted in this story as unable to think for themselves, resisted Abramoff's total influence and continued to give to Dems, though in diminished amounts.

The full report of this study can be read here:

http://www.prospect.org/web/printfriendly-view.ww?id=10924

There. With 5 minutes and Google, a lowly peon could uncover and illustrate truth about Abramoff that Deb Howell could not with a week and a by-line in the Washington Post.

WASHINGTN POST CO B

Last Trade: 740.00
Trade Time: 10:02AM ET
Change: 0.00 (0.00%)
Prev Close: 740.00
Open: 740.00

Tee Hee. Taniwha complains about Mr. Domenech refering to "unhinged elements of their base, motivated by partisan rage, Michael Moore conspiracies" at the same time she is calling people Nazis.

I think she just about proved Mr. Domenech's point herslef....

Fred, if you want to be taken seriously, you have to show a minimum level of brain activity. "Nazis" is in quotation marks! It's not Taniwha who said that, k?

The Washington Post Dictionary:

Conversation (n.): An exchange in which one party invites another to discuss thoughts, opinions, and feelings, and then refuses to listen or respond in any sense.

Balance (n.): A state of equilibrium between facts and rhetoric ("Deb Howell brought balance to the discussion by giving equal space to the Flat Earth Society").

Credibility (n.) (archaic): An unnecessary or irrelevant concern.

Fred, quid pro quo. Your rightwing pals insult the rest of us, we'll insult you back. Deal, chickenhawk.

"Liberals are actually helping The Washington Post make more money since now they can charge advertisers more money due to the increase in traffic.

Posted by: Fred | March 23, 2006 10:38 AM"

Nice try, Fred. I'm sure I'm not the only one who never sees the advertisements on this site because my PC blocks them before they're ever loaded. Nor is any analysis of my surfing trends going to be of much value because "web beacons" (formerly known as "web bugs") are blocked as well. Nope. The only revenue the Post will make from all this is from the redstate readers who probably click more often than bluestate readers on the big tits and dating service ads that pop up.

Paul Curtis-

Nice!

WASHINGTN POST CO B

Last Trade: 736.50
Trade Time: 10:59AM ET
Change: Down 3.50 (0.47%)
Prev Close: 740.00
Open: 740.00

Wrong. There is no evidence to support that Abramoff, through any of his channels, directed any money at all go to Dems. Nearly all of his Indian clients were givers to both parties and elected officials prior to Abramoff's association with said clients.

Ben, there is "evidence" that Abramoff did, at least indirectly "direct" (i.e. people on Abramoff's "team" suggested donations to Democrats, and in some instances the advice was taken) contributions to Democratic candidates.

What is missing, and what makes Brady, Howell, Schmidt, et.al. dishonest, is that they have provided no *proof* to back up the accusations they made about Abramoff and contributions to Democrats --- and the evidence they did offer up was dishonest in the extreme. (The evidence I cite in the previous paragraph was from independent research I've done, along with work done by people like Ron Bryaent from Raw Story and EmptyWheel at The Last Hurrah.)

In other words, don't say "no evidence" --- there is "evidence". There is also "evidence" that Jim Brady, John Harris, Len Downie, Caroline Little and Deborah Howell are completely corrupt political hacks who don't give a flying fig about journalistic principles --- in fact, there is considerable "evidence" to support those assertions. But "proof".... not quite.

Is the new Red State Blogger really that racist Augustine?

Patrick,

Apparently he is! The WaPo should be proud it hired a racist fascist.

Would you all please stop using my name in vain?!?!?!?!

I agree, stop using my name in vain!

http://www.redstate.com/print/2005/9/30/123649/894

"People who are poor and black are a drag on society. We would all be better off if there were fewer of them. Since we have, with little success, spent trillions of dollars over the past several decades trying to make poor blacks non-poor, it is time we recognize that there are more efficient means of eliminating the drag.... "

(and this is actually representative of the whole piece....)

this was posted by "Augustine" (i.e. Ben) on Red State on 9-30-2005. He's actually posting (without any comment) something that someone else wrote in a "religious" publication called First Things.

(Hat Tip to Steve Gilliard)

I hope the Washington Post doesn't take the shrillness in here or any other thread on this topic as an excuse to disregard, ignore, or attack the posters of these comments. Instead, I hope the Post takes a long, hard look at itself and tries to understand what it's role has been in inviting this shrillness.

The Post will ignore all customer comment, regardless of whether or not it's shrill or calm. They don't care. They only care about the rich GOP tools who pay them lots of money to hire their chromosomally-challenged fratboy mindset children.

Steph,

I believe they'll ignore the criticism regardless. Look at how they define 'discussion' as "the big business folks come in and pat themselves on the back but don't listen to reader concerns".

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Milbank is NOT an opinion writer. He writes on the news side and thus the idea that washingtonpost.com needs to "balance" him with a conservative blog is ridiculous. It's like saying, "We need to balance Howie Kurtz, so we'll bring in some nonjournalist, special interest hack."

Just because Dana Milbank appears in teh "news" section doesn't mean he isn't an opinion wirter. Dana Milbank is nothing more than a Democratic Party toy soldier that spits out whatever the DNC wants him to write. The difference between Milbank and Domenech is Demonench at least admits his bias while Milbank tries to claim he is objective.

If The Washington Post really wants to provide balance, they should allow a conservative column to appear in teh print edition side-by-side with Milbank's column.

Fred,

That's what Charlie Krauthammer's for.

I think the big question now is, Will the Post publicly explain the process by which Ben Domenech was hired? What sort of background work was done? And after Ben has been let go, will the Post explain why?

WASHINGTN POST CO B

Last Trade: 740.30
Trade Time: 12:51PM ET
Change: Up 0.30 (0.04%)
Prev Close: 740.00
Open: 740.00

Krauthammer is on the editorial page. I am talking about someone in the "news" section to counteract the liberal Dana Milbank.

There is a rumor on the web that your new blogger, under a pseudonym, accused Coretta King of being a 'communist.' On what grounds? Her husbands assocation with Stanley Levison in the 1950s? That was J. Edgar Hoover's reason for harassing King constantly--indeed for trying to get him to commit suicide with the threat of blackmail. But all the recent scholarship makes it clear King himself was not a Communist in any way, shape, or form. And I've never seen anything anywhere suggesting that his wife was a Communist. Since your blogger doesn't allow questions or comments, could you pose the question to him? thank you

...just why are publishing the Augustine guy? You must surely have been tipping over when you discovered the concept of balance.

who cares if he posts racist remarks under pseudonyms? so what if he thinks King was a commy? he was probably 12 when he wrote that stuff. now he's much more mature at ... 24

24 hours later, and still nothing from the powers that be. Wow, this is some great conversation!

Fred,

"Krauthammer is on the editorial page. I am talking about someone in the "news" section to counteract the liberal Dana Milbank."

Dana Milbank reports news, not his opinion. Otherwise, he'd be in the opinion section.

You have your little Chickenhawk Homeschool Runner in the Opinion Section with his "Hate Everyone Who Ain't My Kinda Redfascist" blog. We'll simply have to have the post bring in someone who's not a moron to balance out the intellectual black hole that is Red Amurrikuh.

Re Red America: You really need to Google anyone being hired for such a high-profile position. Now Brady will be embarrassed, Bush-like, to back off.

Fred, you imbecile, have you ever read Jim VandeHei?

Stop complaining about my friend's son. His father was Tom DeLay's money bag man, a real stand up guy, if you know what I mean. And the Post surely does know: they've been doing a great job covering our behinds. Ben's dad helped me get things set up with the White House in our goal of, as I said before, 'permanently removing the Democratic party from power'. Just because we used money laundering and bribes when working towards that goal, it doesn't mean that it wasn't a worthy goal!

But getting back to my buddy Domenech, it was only natural that we would get his boy to work in the White House as well. It's true that the boy can't write very well and has said a few politically unwise things, but it was under a pseudonym, so that doesn't really make him racist. Given that the good people at the White House (and, not to boast, myself as well...) have such cred with The Washington Post, it was only natural that we'd get them to hire Ben.

So what if he was homeschooled in one of the most priviledged insider right-wing Republican families in Washington, DC? He's our boy, and he represents our kind of heartland America!

Love,

Jack Abramoff

[p.s. -- dear Post censor, this is legitimate satire, written by the poster also known as 'mike', please do not delete.]

1100+ posts on main thread.

115 here on the "God, aren't I and my team fabulous" discussion thread.

Silence.

Is anyone on the Post.com staff not a pathetically gutless coward?

People who are greedy and Jewish are a drag on society. We would all be better off if there were fewer of them. Since we have, with little success, spent trillions of dollars over the past several decades trying to make greedy Jews non-greedy, it is time we recognize that there are more efficient means of eliminating the drag. Stated so bluntly, many readers might find that way of putting the matter morally problematic. The extermination of anti-social elements does, after all, have a somewhat controversial history."

indeed....

of course, according to Ben D. there is absolutely nothing anti-semitic about the above statement. Even though it reads like something out of one of Hitler's speeches -- according to Ben, it couldn't be anti-semitic if Hitler was saying it to make a speech about what a bad thing abortion was.....

well, it turns out that Ben can add "plagarist" to his list of qualifications now....

http://yourlogohere.blogspot.com/2006/03/nail-meet-coffin.html

From the Washington Post's Newest Writer:

"Some people have taken issue with an old two-line comment of mine on RedState.com where I referred to Coretta Scott King as a Communist on the day after her funeral...Mrs. King participated in many different political causes, some of which involved associations with questionable people, but referring to her as a Communist was a mistake, hyperbole in the context of a larger debate about President Bush's political priorities."

Wow, he sounds so sincere. Perhaps the Post should rename the blog: Red Baiting America as that still seems pretty apt.

Could editors at the Post please answer the following questions: Who made to decision to start Red America? Why was it started? Will the post consider hiring a liberal progressive blogger? If not, why?

Your silence smacks of cowardice and hypocracy.

oh man the plagiarism thing stix!

Ms. Little,

It has come to my attention that you recently hired a blogger for your new "Red America" section.

It has also come to my attention that this blogger, Ben Domenech is a plagiarist.

A column he wrote while at William and Mary--and available here:
http://flathat.wm.edu/November191999/opinionsstory2.html--was clearly plagiarized verbatim et literatum from the work of writer and humorist P.J. O'Rourke.

--you can get a sample of O'Rourke's work here:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/087113375X/ref=sib_vae_pg_176/103-2710431-5495058?%5Fencoding=UTF8&keywords=real%20parties&p=S05F&twc=12&checkSum=aQx3Z%2BY2G5IYmTMguHOh62tWccqPbDBb15LNZcwG4Bw%3D#reader-page

I expect that the Post will immediately fire Mr. Domenech.

Y'all don't understand. Little Ben was hired because he is ONE OF THEM. Rich, white, elite, sheltered, the good life handed to him on a platter through his father's connections. Never a need to examine his core beliefs. Never a need to expose himself to the riffraff.

Ben represents the Washington Post. His writing reflects what the management believes but can't say our of convention and tradition. Brady, Howell, et al, really do believe that this man represents conservatives like themselves. And so he does.

After all, he, a former Bush Administration official, was recruited, vetted, interviewed, and hired, by Brady and apparently Carol Little. Apparently the interview recounted by Ben himself didn't raise red flags, and you really have to believe that they knew what they were getting.

Either that, or Dana Milbank pulled a big juicy fast one, on the way back from the woodshed. har har.

(Washington DC)The Washington Post's newest writer, Ben Domenech, apologized today for calling civil rights leader Coretta Scott King as a communist on the day after her funeral.

"Mrs. King participated in many different political causes, some of which involved associations with questionable people," Mr. Domenech stated, "Despite this, calling her a communist was hyperbole in the larger debate about whether President Bush should have attended her funeral or gone to a anti-abortion rally. My bad."

The Washington Post writer also clarified that when he posted an article that began "People who are poor and black are a drag on society. We would all be better off if there were fewer of them", he really meant the opposite of that. Mr. Domenech, who posted the article to his former blog with no additional commentary, stated "I didn't think I needed to qualify the idea that when I posted that black people are a drag on society, I was really showing how disgusting this thought is".

The Washington Post writer further added, "I can recommend a good reading program for people with disabilites if they didn't get this."

Mr. Domenech's editor and publisher at the Washington Post were unavailable for comment.

It just seems to me like this is worth repeating: compounding the Post's many recent mistakes is the fact that it has just hired a plagairist: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/3/23/152531/888

And we're still waiting for that "conversation" to start...

I esp. liked this from Big Dumb Ben:

"Some people have taken issue with an *old* two-line comment of mine on RedState.com where I referred to Coretta Scott King as a Communist on the day after her funeral."

So just how long ago was that King funeral, anyway? A year? Two years? Try NOT EVEN TWO MONTHS AGO!

What a wanker. Nice hire, Post. You guys really are pathetic.

(Washington DC) The Washington Post's newest writer, Ben Domenech, today was accused of being a plagerist.

The 24-year old Washington Post writer, who recently apologized for calling civil rights leader Coretta Scott King a communist, is accused of copying word for word a chapter on how to throw a real party from P.J. O'Rourke's book "Modern Manners". Mr. Domenech published the chapter under his own name in his university's humor magazine.

"We all knew he faked it at the time," said a college roommate of Mr. Domenech, who asked to remain anonymous because he had not been authorized to talk about the incident. "I mean, c'mon, Ben was never invited to parties. Of course, he'd have lie or plagerize to write an article about parties."

"Ben was more into playing Contra-3 on his Nitendo that going to parties," said another friend, who asked to remain anonymous because Ben stilled owed him money and he wanted to make sure he had a chance of getting it back.

"He had this whole theory that people who worried about bodybags in a time of war were like people who hit the reset button. Or something. He didn't go to parties. He was kind of wierd."

Mr. Domenech's editor and publisher at the Washington Post were unavailable for comment.

Ms. Little
I am astounded that you are allowing Ben, the Red State blogger, to stay on board the Washington Post.

If I were you, as soon as this came to light, I would have dismissed him.

For such cases apologies are not enough, even if they are sincere, although in this instance I doubt that your new blogger is sincere.

What are you waiting for?

Last Trade: 739.00
Trade Time: 4:01PM ET
Change: Down 1.00 (0.14%)
Prev Close: 740.00
Open: 740.00

O! The Irony!

"'Mrs. King participated in many different political causes, some of which involved associations with questionable people,' Mr. Domenech stated"

This from a guy whose father was the laision between the White House and CONVICTED FELON JACK ABRAMOFF himself.

It just doesn't get better than this. It just doesn't.

Continuing our "conversation"...

It's becoming apparent that there in fact may be a PATTERN of plagiarism by Domenech. In addition to apparently plagiarizing O'Rourke, Domenech seems to have copied material from Salon.com's Stephanie Zacharek (discovered by DKos contributer "silence"):

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/3/23/152531/888/61#61

(Washington DC) The Washington Post's newest writer, Ben Domenech, defended his practice of making money selling U.S. Marine Corp themed mugs.

"No, I would never join the Marines," stated the 24-year old Washington Post writer, who recently apologized for calling civil rights leader Coretta Scott King a communist and faces accusations of plagerism. Until recently, Mr. Domenech sold mugs online bearing phrase: "Marine Sniper: You Can Run But You Die Tired,"

"Look, I support the Marines. I don't think you have to be in the Marines to make money off the Marines," stated Mr. Domenech, "You think all those people selling 'PornStar' shirts are in that business?"

Mr. Domenech's editor and publisher at the Washington Post were unavailable for comment.

Ms. Little, what exactly is YOUR definition of 'interactive'? It's now much more than 24 hours after this discussion started, there's more than 1200 comments on the main thread, and no response from WaPo staff at all!
At least imho this is not interactive, this is not a dialogue, this behavior can only be described as retreating into the shell. Again.

I am still trying to figure out why anyone would go to the web site of a national newspaper to read the rantings of someone that is already posting and accessible elsewhere on the Web.

If the Post doesn't endorse this "opinion," then why bother providing special access to it when anyone who wants to read such stuff can certainly freely go to the web site?

(Washington DC) The Washington Post's newest writer, Ben Domenech, today defended his description of federal U.S. judges as being "worse then the KKK."

"Judges allow abortions," stated the 24-year old Washington Post writer, who recently apologized for calling civil rights leader Coretta Scott King a communist and faces accusations of plagerism.

"Unlike the KKK, they don't even use the vile pretense of skin color. They dismiss the value of all unborn lives, not just the lives of ethnic minorities."

Mr. Domenech also defended his description of Washington Post Dan Froomkin as a "a lying weasel-faced Democrat shill."

"I mean, come on, look at him," stated Mr. Domenech, "Tell me he doesn't look like a weasel or at least a ferret."

Mr. Domenech's editor and publisher at the Washington Post were unavailable for comment.

Does this site's award for "Best Employment Strategy" get retracted for hiring serial plagiarists like Ben Domenech?

(Washington DC) Washington Post.com Opinions editor, Hal Straus, recently defended the hiring conservative writer Ben Domenech. Mr. Domenech, the Washington Post's newest writer, is accused of having plagerized and publishing several articles while attending William and Mary University.

"When WP.com launched Opinions we said we wanted this new area to be about a variety of voices across a broad spectrum of political and cultural thought," Strauss stated. "We never said that it was about original thoughts or opinions. If our writers copy and paste from other writers, that's fine with me."

"Ben Domonech is an Internet pioneer," continued Mr. Strauss. "Ben is an accomplished writer and someone who is willing to challenge sloppy thinking even if, occasionally, he plagerizes it from other writers.

Washington Post publisher Caroline Little and exective editor James Brady were both unavailable for comment.

James,

Got it in one bud.

The Post is neither liberally nor conservatively biased on a consistent basis. It is _class_ biased.

They pretty much are a stereotype. On cultural issues, they tend left. On economic issues, they tend right. And don't even get started on their Editorial staff, who's writing positively drip with "here's what the lowly peons should do".

So does Ignatius. And now they have Howell, who's disdain for readers is truly hilarious for an "Ombudsman".

I honestly believe no one there at the decision making level saw anything the slightest bit wrong with hiring an untalented rich guy's kid without much checking. After all, he came from the "right stock", and went to the "right6 schools".

I sincerely doubt that anything is goinbg to come from the massive reader complaints, other than another round of sneering Sundays from Lovey, and whining from Brady about how mean everyone is.

You are making terrible mistakes in strategy and execution.

If you want to hire a conservative blogger for balance, so be it. Couldn't you have found one that:

-wasn't a pseudo-racist?
-didn't have a history of plagiarism?
-wasn't so obviously lacking in intellectual curiousity?

More to the point, you must understand that you are under increased scrutiny from your readers.

Not only do they have the tools and market power, but you've also blown the biggest single building block of future success for all media businesses: trust.

Your readers are losing trust in you - fast.

I'm not just embarassed by your decision; I'm also startled by your almost total lack of managerial competence and lack of understanding of what the future driver of success as a publisher are.

This is beyond surreal.

I can only conclude that the hiring of Ben Domenech was a scheme cooked up in the bowels of the Washington DC liberal establishment (or in the middle management of the Washington Post) to portray conservatism in the worst light possible.

Would be rather like hiring Louis Farrakhan to represent the Democratic Party perpective.

Unfortunately for the Post, you've managed to step in doo doo again, in your choice of Ben Domenech for a blogger.

I wish I could feel for you, but I find it hard to. Not after your previous debacles with Woodward and the Abramoff brouhaha.

So, is Ben fired yet?

I admit to being flabbergasted - isn't there anyone at all at the Post that has the slightest clue about who and what are said on blogs ?
Did you really think that Redstate is credible ?

Isn't there someone you can ask for advice before you embarrass yourselves further ?

It's a rather sad day when the Katharine Graham's newspaper feels it has to hire a Republican propagandist because Republicans think facts are biased. It's even sadder when the great minds that run Mrs. Graham's newspaper can't find anyone better to express conservative opinion in this country than an embittered young racist and serial plagiarist. Of course young Master Ben will, I'm sure, be joining the military soon to help out the cause he so believes in. Maybe in the future, conservative opinion could be represented in the Post by George Will, Charles Krauthammer, David Broder, Sebastian Mallaby, Robert Samuelson, Jim Hoagland, or Fred Hiatt....oh, wait a minute.
Or maybe the Post could really go out on a limb, reach beyond the Beltway establishment and hire the man who is, as near as I can tell, the last honest, lucid conservative in the country, Stephen Chapman of the Chicago Tribune.
Donnie Graham's stewardship of his mama's paper is the best argument for an inheritance tax since Paris Hilton was first photographed.

Really, I taught him that attribution is next to godliness (after cleanliness but before truthiness). I told him that cut and paste ended at kindergarten. I encouraged him to express himself through HIS words, not someone else's.

Oh, my head hurts.

Are you aware of Ben Domenech's father's connections to Jack Abramoff? Apparently he was the Bush admin man whose job was making Jack happy. After Deborah Howell's debacle as regards Abramoff, is this really the message you want to send your readers? Really, hiring the offspring of an Abramoff crony is too low for words.

What a joke. I won't hold my breath waiting for an answer.

I'm also curious why the Post went out of its way to hire a racist. Why don't you just rename the paper the "Red State Post."

My university students get an F for plagiarism. The F you should give has four other letters, Fired!

As an occasional reader of the Post, I do not much mind that you have created a new blog for Ben Domenech, however execrable his opinions or rhetoric. He has a right to say whatever, and you have a right to publish whatever.

But the issue of plagiarism is a journalistic sin. You must respond somehow, even to defend Mr. Domenech, or give up any pretense to self-respect. At least News of the World makes stuff up creatively.

I've never felt compelled to comment on a blog before, but is this Red State guy a joke? He can't write, he seems to be borderline racist, and he's basically an idiot with no understanding of the issues!

Makes me think this guy's a plant to make conservatives look bad.

There are a lot of great conservative bloggers out there, why in the heck did you hire this loser?

What a clown show your hiring process must be!

Ed: your faux news releases are fabulous! Keep 'em coming.

Little and Brady: if you haven't gotten the message yet, you *hired a plagiarist.* He lied to you, just as he stole from other writers. He misrepresented himself. You will have to fire him at some point. There is no way around this. You're in Jason Blair territory. For your sakes and ours, you must dump him right now and save at least some face. You cannot keep a documented plagiarist on-board and be taken seriously as a major newspaper.

So, you've dumped 10 percent of your news-room staff and have picked up a serial plagarist, racist, virulent right winger. I guess this is what passes for journalism in the Bu$h regime. I bet Jeffrey Gannon/Guckert might be available as well. If he doesn't have any current assignations...I hear he's not a reporter. He should fit in with the new Washington Post very well. Who's the publisher these days? Dr. Josef Goebbels?

Dear Mr. Brady why did you hire Ben Domenech when he is a known plagiarist and racist? Don't get that move sir.

Perhaps if you had launched both a Red State and a Blue State blog we could have had a real discussion and nobody would have been angry enough to start background searches to find Mr. Domenech's plagiarism.

Now you should probably show him the door.

At this point the absurdity is as much in piling on as in pointing out the obvious:

The Edsel was a better concept and sold more units.

I do wonder what Mr. Broder (and even Mr. Krauthammer) have said to you, on and off the record, regarding the placement of a non-degreed plagiarist at the vanguard of your public interaction.

Perhaps your vetting process could use some improvement. I understand Harriet Miers may have some availability. I'm sure she could offer her insight.

Saw Red State and couldn't didn't bother to read all of the posts in this thread.

Special treatment for this one particular voice?

I don't do slanted media.

Baltimore Sun will have to do.

To think I have, on many occasions, defended your rag.

Shameful.

Hey guys!

Thanks for this Red America thing, it's hilarious! This has been one of the funniest things to watch develop. What were y'all thinking? Geez, what a joke.

Now, I'll admit, WaPo still has some great journalism going on, but this is seriously so sad it's effing hilarious. And that is in itself is sad, but i digress.

Maybe y'all should have a quick refresher course on journalism ethics and "business 101".

Best,

Kudos to "Ed" for his "Dateline: Washington DC" pieces on the "response" to Ben D's scandals....

Well, I see cowardice still rules with the Post.com team.

BTW - Your drop down link to this blog still points to the old location. Imagine how many BLATANTLY OBVIOUS BUGS COULD BE FIXED if you saved the wing-nut weregeld to Benny and hired another technical staffer! Or maybe paid your DC Metro staff to update DC Wire more than once a week?

Are we for real? This Ben guy has been shown to copy other people's work, and when he isn't doing that, he's busy writing about aborting black babies. Let's get away from this guy as quickly as possible, before we REALLY start dropping in the polls.

The Post should cancel this guy. He isn't part of MY Republican party.

I just read at http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/3/23/181857/404

some of the plagiarisms and obscene language that Domenech has engaged in. I'm outraged that the Washington Post would hire someone like him as a columnist. Are you intent in becoming a joke among national papers?

Your new blogger, Ben Domenech, is a hack. He's the lowest of low forms among writers - a plagiarist - and there can be no quarter for plagiarism at ANY newspaper, let alone one of the country's most important/respected. It's completely appalling.

I suggest you go to Dailykos.com and check out examples of Mr. Domenech plagiarising, and I mean word for word, both Salon.com and P.J. O'Rourke. Stomach-turning grotesquery of the lowest order. I'm a writer myself, and I cannot tell you how much I despise a plagiarist. But I guess you probably are getting a darned good idea.

Listen, if you want a blogger from the left, I'm here for you. But I'd even do it from the right, if it meant stifling the "voice" of a voice-stealer.

Ed, your stuff is great!

Oy vey! Little Ben even ripped off the Post!

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/3/23/152531/888/208#208

I don't think I even have to mention the word "irony."

What a world, what a world . . .

you couldn't be happy w/just a regular republican? you had to find yourself a fundie fanatic too! homeschooled, straight out of dobsenland, the whole 9 yds. now, who are you going to find to balance this out? an earth first anarchist? no middle of the roaders for the wapo!!!

i remember the good old days when republican just stood for independence, fiscal issues, etc. now it stands for coulterisms (moonbats, unhinged, completely unoriginal namecalling) constant references to biblical jargon, cheerleading slogans (pro life! as if that isn't partisan).

what a joke you all are. back here in the real world, aren't you wondering about your reputation?? are you believing the average american is going to think this flys?

do you have a boss? can they read?

Schadenfreude! Wooohooo!

Would you please explain the editorial mind set that leads you to hire a racist and a plagiarist.