Daily Kos

UPDATED: Washington Post's Hsu gave to GOP to cover hotel bill - please UNRECOMMEND

Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 02:56:20 PM PDT

UPDATE: Looks like a legitimate expenditure:
Michael David Smith points out that Opensecrets.org lists Washington Post reporter Spencer Hsu as a Republican Party of Virginia contributor. Not true, says Post assistant managing editor/metro news Robert McCartney. He writes: "This payment was not a political contribution or donation of any kind. It was reimbursement to the Virginia Republican Party for a hotel room for Mr. Hsu during the Republican National Convention in New York. Mr. Hsu was covering the Virginia delegation to the convention. Standard practice was to house the reporter with the delegation, and to reimburse the delegation later for the cost."
First, read Armando's diary

Then join me on the jump and read this. You judge for yourself if  Washington Post reporter Spencer Hsu made an "honest mistake" or deliberately helped spread GOP talking points.

From a letter on Romenesko's Media News:

Washington Post ombudsman Michael Getler wrote on Sunday of the Post's decision to print the false accusations of a senior Bush official against Louisiana Governor Kathleen Babineaux Blanco. Getler acknowledged that Post reporter Spencer S. Hsu was wrong to repeat a bogus charge, but he also took a swipe at people "who use such moments to bash the media for alleged bias."
The thing is, there is nothing "alleged" in Spencer Hsu's bias. His bias is right there, out in the open, for all to see.

By law, political donations are disclosed in this country, which means that Hsu can't hide that he's a Republican partisan: The public information that he gave $1,031 to the Republican Party of Virginia last year makes that perfectly clear to anyone who wants to look.
Maybe Hsu thought no one would bother to look at the public record because he couldn't be bothered to look at the public record of whether Blanco had declared a state of emergency.

Here's the link to his contributions listed on Open Secrets.

HSU, SPENCER MR
WASHINGTON,DC 20071
    WASHINGTON POST/REPORTER
    8/4/2004
    $1,031
    Republican Party of Virginia

From The Post's response, it looks like a legitimate reimbursal and I owe Hsu an apology which I'll deliver in an email to him. That said, should I delete this diary? UPDATE: New on Romenesko: [Michael David Smith's letter regarding Spencer Hsu and opensecrets.org will be reposted with the Washington Post's response.] Looking forward to that response. UPDATE again: Here's the Post's full response:

From ROBERT McCARTNEY, assistant managing editor for metropolitan news, Washington Post: [Response to Michael David Smith's letter.] The listing on the Opensecrets.org website is inaccurate in suggesting that Washington Post reporter Spencer Hsu made a political donation of $ 1,031 to the Virginia Republican Party on Aug. 4, 2004. This payment was not a political contribution or donation of any kind. It was reimbursement to the Virginia Republican Party for a hotel room for Mr. Hsu during the Republican National Convention in New York. Mr. Hsu was covering the Virginia delegation to the convention. Standard practice was to house the reporter with the delegation, and to reimburse the delegation later for the cost. We have a Washington Post expense ledger that shows that Mr. Hsu was reimbursed $ 1,031.08 by The Post for "Lodging" on Aug. 6, 2004. Washington Post reporters are not permitted to make political contributions -- and none was made in this case. This evening we have contacted the executive director of the Center for Reponsive Politics, which sponsors the Opensecrets.org Web site, and asked the website to delete this inaccurate listing. He said he suspected the error occurred because the payment was misclassified by the Federal Elections Commission. We have also contacted the Virginia Republican Party, which has agreed to write a letter outlining the mutual understanding that this payment was a reimbursement rather than a political donation. I include below a copy of an Aug. 5, 2005 article from the Richmond Times-Dispatch reporting that it ran into a similar difficulty regarding its reporters who covered the Virginia delegation at the 2004 convention. ARTICLE FROM RICHMOND TIMES-DISPATCH: Journalists who covered event listed as donors to state GOP Richmond Times-Dispatch Friday, August 5, 2005 A reporter and photojournalist for the Richmond Times-Dispatch are listed among contributors to the Republican Party of Virginia in federal campaign-finance reports as a result of covering the Republican National Convention last year. The names of Jeff E. Schapiro (listed erroneously as Jeffrey C. Schapiro) and Robert A. Brown (whose photo credit appears as Bob Brown), as well as other Virginia reporters who attended the event in New York, are included in reports filed with the Federal Election Commission because they paid for their travel and hotel accommodations through the state GOP. The state GOP arranged and paid for the travel and lodging, and The Times-Dispatch reimbursed the state party. Hotel rooms are often in short supply at the national conventions, and reporters prefer to stay at the same hotel as members of their state's delegation. "A number of members of the press corps requested hotel accommodations to be closer to the delegation, and we made available to the capitol press corps the delegation's pricing packages," said Shawn Smith, executive director for the state GOP. Federal election law requires that candidates and political parties report all receipts and disbursements exceeding $200. "This is a transaction which is required by law to be reported," Smith said. Virginia reporters who covered the Democratic National Committee in Boston last summer didn't stay at the same hotel as the Virginia delegation and paid their hotel directly.

Tags: (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 141 comments

  •  Excellent (3.95 / 21)

    Recommended.

    And how are you dude?

    Everybody dies alone.

    by Armando on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 02:55:23 PM PDT

  •  Fish in a barrel these days. (4.00 / 9)

    Are we getting better at this sort of thing, or are they slipping at covering their tracks?

    Hand me down my walking cane, hand me down my hat...

    by Cheez Whiz on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 02:59:28 PM PDT

    •  Cheez Whiz (4.00 / 9)

      They just don't think it matters any more. The fix is in.

      "There is nothing more stimulating than a case where everything goes against you." S.H.

      by Carnacki on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:15:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yep, That's Been the Defining Aspect (4.00 / 7)

        of Bush Admin behavior since they marauded in.

        Before the Iraq war I sent LTE's to a number of regional papers suggesting that because of their frequent use of the accusation, the word "irrelevant" might eventually be seen as the most important word spoken in early 21st century America. Because either they were insane and would bring themselves down, possibly damaging the country seriously, or else they were right--leading economic and military powers, including nuclear powers--really have become irrelevant to America, in which case we the people may be irrelevant as well.

        I've speculated in comments that if Bush ultimately fails, it will probably be due to jumping the gun a few years ahead of the time when revelation of their frauds and shennanigans really won't matter if we don't turn things around.

        But it's hard not to feel the fix is indeed in as long as they conduct all the voting on their private, secret property.

        We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

        by Gooserock on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:26:07 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  slightly OT (4.00 / 5)

      Sorta kinda.  We may be getting better at some things, but we're not better at coordinated attacks on Republican weaknesses from Dem leadership on down... Bush's goddmaned approval rating went from 38% to 42% this week.  Goddamnit.  And I have to tell you honestly - I think it's because Democratic leaders were too late and WAY too far behind the curve to garner any moral leadership on the subject of Katrina and New Orleans.

      </rant>

      Sorry to hijack the thread.

      •  Dont' fall for this.... (none / 1)

        these are different polls with different polling methodologies.  Gallup always has been high.

        There is no doubt that Bush's numbers will vary by poll, but I doubt that this fluctuation is even real.  Polls can be manipulated within a few points quite easily.  I read an article last week (can't remember where) which stated that Gallup pollsters rarely read the full questions.

        Bush's numbers may be irrelevant now.  He may be irrelevant now.  What matters are the Democrats.  We must turn all pressure on them to make sure they do and say the right things.

        Any party that would lie to start a war would also steal an election.

        by landrew on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:28:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I hear you, but Gallup's figure was 46%. (none / 0)

          Again, up substantially.  

          And I totally agree with you on the Democrats issue -- WHERE IS THEIR UNIFIED, STRONG VOICE??  This is making me crazy.

          :: << head explodes >> ::

          •  And, as importantly, the MSM (none / 0)

            is reporting those numbers as a real positive for Bush; i.e. good things are happening and he's getting some credit for it. He hasn't done a damn thing but the uptick in polls will help his image. People are so stupid.  And, yes, where are the Dems to remind everyone about the screw-ups??
            •  You took the words (none / 0)

              right out of my mouth.  It's not so much that there is a number or the validity of the number - but if the number itself is couched in a positive light, the damage is done.

              If you haven't already, check the Lakoff diary and the frameshop diary on the recommended list (they were there an hour ago).  I'm not encouraged by the democratic non-response.  It's like we squandered and opportunity handed to us on a silver platter.

              At the risk also of starting a TOTAL flame war, I have to say that I have not been impressed with Dean's inability to get his party leadership in line, which should have been an immediate requirement.

            •  Have to agree with RenaF (none / 0)

              Though perhaps not in the way she intended.  We're arguing about whether 46% is an uptick?  We should be dancing in the streets about that argument.  

              The problem is the dems in Washington aren't taking full advantage.  For goodness' sake, Clinton is still a hawk!

              A few more weeks of this and I'm gonna start thinking the Dems in office don't want a majority.

    •  The pot (none / 0)

      is overflowing, becoming difficult for them to hide the stench. (Sorry for the crudeness.)
  •  Ugh. (4.00 / 3)

    And at the Washington Post no less.

    Hi nackie.  :-)

  •  Tell Josh Marshall (4.00 / 3)

    He's following this over at talkingpointsmemo.com
  •  What about Kyra Phillips? (4.00 / 4)

    Who did she donate to last year?  How about Norah O'Donnell?  Cokie Roberts?  (How come so many of them are women?)

    -3.63, -4.46 "Choose something like a star to stay your mind on- and be staid"

    by goldberry on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:02:28 PM PDT

    •  Nora/Cokie (4.00 / 8)

      Nora is a GOP shill.

      Cokie WORKS for Bush. She is on some kind of presidential committee for volunteering or something.

      •  Right (none / 0)

        on Nora O'Donnell. She doesn't even pretend to hide the fact that she is a shill for the Bush junta. But I am willing to forgive her transgression for a dinner&movie ;-)
        •  Your lucky someone does not (none / 0)

          give you a 1 for that!

          Will the elite be happy living behind gated communities in the potential meltdown? Peace now. -7.00, -2.92

          by mattes on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 05:29:24 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Ummm, judicious lust is OK by me (none / 0)

            Nora is very pretty so it's natural to be attracted to her.  We were made to feel that way.  Nuthin wrong with a little lust.  Sex would be too Vulcan for me if I had to check my hormones at the door everytime I saw a guy with a nice butt.  
            It's kind of a cruel twist of nature to be attracted to someone so utterly devoid of a conscience tho'...

            -3.63, -4.46 "Choose something like a star to stay your mind on- and be staid"

            by goldberry on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 07:47:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Actually, (4.00 / 2)

            I could be skin-to-skin naked with that bitch and it would still be like trying to put an oyster in a parking meter. There's something about having an 'ugly soul'--her 'politics' (read: mercenary nihilism) might as well be a loud, pungent fart let right in my face when I'm starting to get down. Same effect. Total turn-off. Sorry, my dick just doesn't work for republican shills. And I doubt any amount of Bob Dole's Viagra would help.    

            Proud member of the surreality-based community.

            by syntaxin on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 10:27:43 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  FWIW (none / 0)

        Cokie's brother Thomas has given thousands to Democratic candidates over the years.

        And as things fell apart
        Nobody paid much attention
        -- Talking Heads, (Nothing But) Flowers

        by wanderindiana on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 04:11:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I saw her on Letterman last week (4.00 / 2)

        When Dave Letterman asked her what went wrong in New Orleans she came right out and said (paraphrasing): "What happened was a massive failure of FEMA to do its job." She didn't spout any Rove talking points that I heard.
        •  I *used* to love her (none / 0)

          But something happened to her over the past couple of years.  Either she has become so Washington insider that she's completely lost touch or she needs the money.  In the past year, the minute she comes on NPR on Monday morning, I head for the shower.  It was almost like listening to Tokyo Rose.  "Give up, sailor.  Your girl has found another beau.  She doesn't care about you."  The way she attempts to put down the nose-picking grassroots who can't possibly know what Washington is really like is so demoralizing.  
          Well, it would be sad if it took the devastation of her home town to bring her around but maybe she has finally snapped out of her insufferable smugness.  
          Nah, I just don't like her anymore.  

          -3.63, -4.46 "Choose something like a star to stay your mind on- and be staid"

          by goldberry on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 07:44:03 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Because News Like Most Programming (none / 0)

      is for women.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:27:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And I wouldn't be suprised if (none / 0)

      "they are so black" Wolfie, Howie Kurtz, Bill Schneider, Daryn Kagan, Kyra Phillips are GOP contributers also.
  •  Nothing shocking (4.00 / 4)

    I am not really surprised. WP editorial page has become completely neoconized. Its news page always goes out of its way to soften the blow of every bad news.
    •  One exception yesterday (4.00 / 11)

      was Michael Hirsh's op-ed.

      Some nice quotes from it:

      "...history will be harsh in its judgments" of the Bush administration. The war on terror has become an Orwellian nightmare, an ill-defined conflict with a fractious group of terrorists that seems to be ever-escalating. At this stage in WWII, Hitler was dead. His top lieutenants, as well as their counterparts in Japan, were awaiting trial for war crimes. By contrast, the chief culprit of 9/11, Osama bin Laden, and his deputy, Ayman Zawahiri, have escaped -- their trail is as cold as it's ever been -- to become mythic rallying figures for radical Islamists."

      and another one:

      An America that was at the top of its game internationally on Sept. 10, 2001 has squandered its prestige. Iraq is draining the most powerful Army in history, America's moral standing in the world is diminished, and our policies, according to the CIA's own analysis, may have only helped to foment the jihadi movement globally. We possess less leverage over the nuclear-minded states of Iran and North Korea. Lacking a bold initiative on energy, we are more beholden to the Arab world and Russia for desperately needed oil. And as our economy amasses record budget and trade deficits, we rely more than ever on the financial goodwill of China, Japan and Europe to keep us afloat.

      and more:

      There is no evidence that Bush ever held a grand strategy session with his principals in which all the variables were laid on the table: the costs of the global war on terrorism, the strategic goal, and the real costs, in dollars and lives, of an Iraq invasion.

      and the killer one:

      Four years into the war on terrorism, it's awfully late to begin devising a broad-based, detailed strategy for the complete destruction of terrorist groups like al Qaeda. Let's hope it's not too late. But the first step is to acknowledge that we haven't yet done it.

      I have never seen anyone say it more clearly in the past four years. Send this on to all the neocon apologizers and the assrockets who are mindlessly repeating the talking points.

  •  Now now now (4.00 / 11)

    I'm sure he's fair and balanced.  He'll print lies that favor Republicans just as often as he prints lies that denigrate Dems.

    "I just had the basic view of the American public -- it can't be that bad out there." Marine Travis Williams after 11 members of his squad were killed.

    by Steven D on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:10:17 PM PDT

  •  Bush crime family (4.00 / 4)

    don't need to hire the hit. Not when they have men(and I use that term loosly) who pay THEM just for the privilege of doing it themselves.

    Journalism.

    Right.

  •  I used to be a newspaper reporter in Lake Placid (4.00 / 7)

    NY.  It was a small weekly paper that was part of a chain based in Wheeling, WV.  The chain also owned a slightly larger daily paper located in Saranac Lake, 10 miles away.

    IIRC, we reporters were told not to participate in politics, and I believe that extended to donating to a political party or candidate.  Have journalistic standards changed as a whole, or is the Post getting too chummy to the Administration?  Of course, Ben Bradlee was apparently buddy-buddy with JFK, but I don't know if he actually donated to political parties.

    -7.13, -6.97 Vice President Cheney is a rogue nation. Keith Olbermann, Countdown (6/21/07)

    by klamothe on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:11:27 PM PDT

    •  Yep, (4.00 / 2)

      that was the rule during my work lifetime in newsrooms.

      His comment was a feeble attempt at whitewash.

      We generally called that B.S.

      Against silence, which is slavery. -- Czeslaw Milosz

      by Caneel on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 04:26:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Me, too (4.00 / 3)

        You didn't give money to political candidates, you didn't take favors/goodies (however innocent or well-intentioned), you tried your darndest to emulate Caesar's wife.

        The degree to which you resist injustice is the degree to which you are free. -- Utah Phillips

        by Mnemosyne on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 04:49:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Same here (4.00 / 3)

      I was a newspaper and reporter for several years, and ALL partisan activity was forbidden. No bumper stickers, no yard signs, no donations, no nothing.

      Institutions like newspapers, at least at that time, valued their objectivity and non-partisanship. Opinion columnists were, of course, a little different. But even they wouldn't donate to candidates or parties.

      Credibility used to be a big deal to journalists. NOT getting personally involved in politics was tough, but we also carried a strange sort of pride in our objectivity.

      I guess that doesn't matter at the Washington Post anymore.

  •  Hey Carnacki! (4.00 / 3)

    I've missed you! Thank you for the diary, btw.

    Liberal parenting funnies at The Hausfrau Blog

    by jamfan on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:13:03 PM PDT

  •  Disgusted by this (none / 1)

    I found that article disturbing as well as one regarding Hillary Clinton and strident democrats.  link  

    "What is hateful to thee, thou shalt not do unto thy neighbor. This is the whole of the Law, the rest is only commentary" Hillel

    by modthinglet on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:13:48 PM PDT

  •  let me point you to an article (4.00 / 6)

    Footnote 12 from our FEC brief:

    "One example should suffice: Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor of The Nation, has given $194,000 to federal candidates, PACs and party organizations over the years, Surely, she still is a journalist worthy of the media exemption, no? See, generally Howard Kurtz, "Journalists Not Loath to Donate To Politicians", Washington Post A-1 (1/18/04), available online at http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A26386-2004Jan17?language=printer.  ("More than 100 journalists and executives at major media companies, from NBC's top executive to a Fox News anchor to reporters or editors for the Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, New York Times, USA Today, CBS and ABC, have made political contributions in recent years."). See also http://www.newsmeat.com/, or just go to http://opensecrets.org/indivs/index.asp and type in "journalist" under occupation."

    From that Kurtz story:

    At the Post, business reporter Albert Crenshaw gave $500 to Maryland Democratic House candidate Ira Shapiro in 2001. Crenshaw said his wife made the donation before he told her that he could not participate in such contributions. Sportswriter Mark Asher gave $500 to Illinois Democratic House candidate Pete Dagher in 2002. He said his wife had worked with Dagher in the Clinton White House.

    Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr. said he would discuss the matter with the reporters' editors. "You can't make political contributions at all," he said, citing the paper's policy.

    •  And? (4.00 / 6)

      Point isn't that you donate to Republicans. Point is that you are carrying water for Republicans. If Hsu has no problem being called a partisan, fine.If Hsu wants to be treated as an honest and non-partisan journalist then I'm afraid he fucked up badly by carrying water for a political group he agrees with.
      •  no, the point is that this story confirms (4.00 / 2)

        that the Post policy forbids reporters from making political contributions, according to the Post itself, at least as of last year.

        and it would be a big surprise if that has changed -- "no political contributions" is standard newsroom policy, as noted above, and in my experience, also.

        The Nation is an advocacy journal, not a newspaper and, as such, is expected to have different standards.

    •  Good work (4.00 / 7)

      acbonin.  I will point out, though, that KVH makes no secret about her political leanings and philosphy.  Everyone who reads The Nation knows where she stands.  A reporter for a respected newspaper, IMHO, has a different standard.  Newspapers have a different role from magazines, especially opinion magazines.  A reporter isn't supposed to insert their personal bias unless it's clearly identified as such:  an opinion column or commentary.

      We have a local political reporter who is quite fair.  Fair to the point that I have no idea what his personal beliefs are.  He reports on what's happening, often has a very interesting, and poignant, take on things, and I respect him.  That's the standard I expect from someone who is REPORTING.  What's more, I'd rather have a Kori Walter (his name, may as well give him a boost) than someone who panders to my side.  That reporter wouldn't be taken seriously by anyone, and everything they wrote would be questionable, as now will happen with Hsu.

      Pennacchio for Pennsylvania

      by PAprogressive on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:31:22 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Does it make a difference? (4.00 / 5)

      The Nation is a progressive magazine read by a specific demographic and the Washington Post is a daily newspaper read by a general demographic.

      I see no reason why journalists should not have the freedom to donate their dollars to any candidate they wish to support.  Just keep it open and above-board.

      The point with Carnacki's diary though, and Armando's, would be the line that was crossed regarding partisanship that led to dishonesty in journalistic standards.  Actually, dishonesty is too nice a word for this issue. Yes, deadlines make people sloppy, but this went far past sloppy.  I know people who have been fired for much less.

      It shouldn't happen at WaPo.  

      [Hey Carnacki! How you been?]

      Our... constitutional heritage rebels at the thought of giving government the power to control men's minds. Thurgood Marshall

      by bronte17 on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:48:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Was there really deadline pressure? (4.00 / 3)

        The article in question appeared in the Sunday WaPo of Sept. 4.  Would Rove or a minion have fed the false info to Hsu in the late afternoon or later on a Saturday?

        The influence of the [executive] has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished.

        by lysias on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 04:24:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Did he lose his job? (4.00 / 4)

    Cause he doesn't deserve to have one, when someone else could do it properly... w/out the lies and propaganda.

    I hope WAPO has let him go.

    U.S. blue collar vs. CEO income in 1992 was 1:80; in 1999 it was 1:475.

    by Lode Runner on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:14:05 PM PDT

  •  Chairman Dean (4.00 / 9)

    Should demand that the Washington Post discipline Hsu, as CBS did Rather.

    Gov. Blanco should stay above the fray, working on Katrina recovery. But Howard can show the state parties that he's go their backs.

  •  I'm less interested in what they donate (4.00 / 2)

    I'm more interested in which entities they receive their "supplementary income" from.

    We flat out know, don't we, that Armstrong Williams was the tip of the iceberg. Some of these shills are so obvious, they HAVE to be on the payroll one way or another. That, to me, is the important thing to attempt to uncover.

    But, as has been pointed out, if the stated policy at WaPo is "no donations" clearly the guy ought to be hog tied and assigned to Superdome clean up duty.

  •  this may be (3.73 / 15)

    the most important diary in here in some time.

    just lays that neocon shitrag open for what it is.

    let's hear howie "gop" kurtz spin this away.

  •  contacts (4.00 / 7)

    Your righteous indignation can go to:

    letters@washpost.com (Letters to the Editor)
    ombudsman@washpost.com (Ombudsman)
    hsus@washpost.com (Hsu)

    Others you can drop a note to if you want (if you do, probably a good idea to taylor it to make it appropriate to the recipient):

    abramowitz@washpost.com (Editor)
    deyoungk@washpost.com (Associate editor)
    hadarm@washpost.com (Assistant managing editor/front page features)
    robertgkaiser@yahoo.com (Associate editor)
    leenj@washpost.com (Assistant Managing Editor/Investigations)

    •  Hsu's reply (none / 1)

      I got this from Hsu:

      Pls see Romenesko correction.
      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Posted, September 12, 2005
      WP: Opensecrets.org's Hsu contribution listing is wrong

      Romenesko Letters
      Michael David Smith points out that Opensecrets.org lists Washington Post reporter Spencer Hsu as a Republican Party of Virginia contributor. Not true, says Post assistant managing editor/metro news Robert McCartney. He writes: "This payment was not a political contribution or donation of any kind. It was reimbursement to the Virginia Republican Party for a hotel room for Mr. Hsu during the Republican National Convention in New York. Mr. Hsu was covering the Virginia delegation to the convention. Standard practice was to house the reporter with the delegation, and to reimburse the delegation later for the cost."

      Replied back to him, and to the editor and ombudsman:

      Thanks you for the clarification, apologies for jumping to gun. I am not, however, a paid reporter at a newspaper of reference, and the matter in question does not involve intentional lies propagated to avoid accountability for thousands of unnecessary deaths.

      I still believe that your stenography for the Administration has been shameful -- and that the article claiming Blanco never declared a state of emergency based on an anonymous source was a fireable offense. The very fact that you reported such a plain and easily checked fact based on an anonymous source is a fireable offense, for you and for whoever was the editor in charge of vetting it. And for the Ombudsman as well, for not having called for the naming of that source.

      If you feel this made you uncomfortable, you might begin to glimpse what your hackery did to Blanco, and how outraged those who had bothered to check the facts felt. And we're not talking about a thousand-dollar campaign contribution, we're talking about intentional lies to wrongfully shift blame to someone else for thousands of unnecessary deaths from drowning or
      dehydration.


  •  I was listening to my toddler's (4.00 / 2)

    cd's the other day and thinking about the state of the press when I figured I had to change my sig line.

    Abe: My Homer is not a communist. He may be a liar, a pig, an idiot, a communist, but he is not a porn star!

    by Sylvester McMonkey Mcbean on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:31:14 PM PDT

  •  FIRE HIM (4.00 / 27)

    He's in violation of the WP Code of Ethics:

    Conflict of Interest

    This newspaper is pledged to avoid conflict of interest or the appearance of conflict of interest, wherever and whenever possible. We have adopted stringent policies on these issues, conscious that they may be more restrictive than is customary in the world of private business.

    [snip]

    We avoid active involvement in any partisan causes - politics, community affairs, social action, demonstrations - that could compromise or seem to compromise our ability to report and edit fairly.  

    Hsu should be fired or the WP Code of Ethics isn't worth the paper it's printed on.

  •  Carnacki, (4.00 / 2)

    So glad to see you back here, you've been missed!

    When the oak is felled the whole forest echoes with its fall, but a hundred acorns are sown in silence by an unnoticed breeze. -Thomas Carlyle

    by Caldonia on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:38:05 PM PDT

  •  The internets are a bitch, ain't they, Hsu? (4.00 / 7)

    Wars not make one great. - Yoda

    by Volvo Liberal on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:46:47 PM PDT

  •  This is f**king angering (none / 1)

    but not surprising from the WaPo.  They have fallen a LONG way since Watergate.

    -7.88, -6.72. "Wherever law ends, tyranny begins."--John Locke IMPEACH THE BASTARDS!!!

    by caseynm on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 03:49:00 PM PDT

  •  I DON'T CARE (none / 1)

    what your diary is about (well, I kinda do, of course!) -- it's just great to "see" you back here!

    cheers,

  •  Not Sure I Agree (4.00 / 3)

    I'm as strident as it comes when it comes to calling this Administration on its lies and calling the media on its laziness, and in this case, the WaPo is standing in the bring sunshine carrying an umbrella frame but no canvas.  There is simply NO justification for not doing the most elementary follow-up to determine whether or not Gov. Blanco of LA had or had not asked for Federal help in a timely manner.  And it was even more egregious when there are so many recent examples of the White House trying to spin blame and facts using anonymous sources and getting caught in a lie in the process.

    What makes me a tad nervous however, is trying to tar Mr. Hsu's every action because he gave money to the GOP.  I am glad that such contributions are public because it does allow us to shine a light on questionable actions such as possible votes for favors.

    However, I think it dangerous for the democratic process if we start making broad accusations like this.  Mr. Hsu ran a story which needed follow up and didn't.  Maybe it is a pattern and maybe it isn't.   And he made a contribution to the GOP.  That's his right as a citizen and he exercised it.  I think we do ourselves no great service by automatically jumping to try and link contribution and potential political bias in reporting on Mr. Hsu's part.  Not everyone in the GOP is unethical (although it sure looks as though the numbers of honest Goopers is a dwindling breed.)

    Certainly the NY Times' Judith Miller established a pattern of writing stories based on bad information from sources who were pushing their own agenda...particularly Mr. Chalabi.  And further investigation is trying to find out just how close to her "sources" she had gotten...particularly within an Administration trying to pitch all sorts of nonsense from mobile chemical labs to drones with warheads to Niger uranium to justify starting an unjustifiable war.

    I'd like to see further evidence however of a continuing pattern of actions on Mr. Hsu's part before we begin to question his motives, his integrity and his work.  At the same time, I think we have a valid right to pound on the head editors at the WaPo and ask them how and why they keep receiving and printing without checking....the spin lines of an Administration which has burned them several times already.

    Free markets would be a great idea, if markets were actually free.

    by dweb8231 on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 04:05:09 PM PDT

    •  Agreed (none / 0)

      This smacks of FReeperesque witch-hunting.  I'd be pretty pissed if the GOP tried to attack a reporter they didn't like because of a donation to a state Democratic party (unless such donations are expressly forbidden by a paper's ethics guidelines).

      Let's focus on the sloppy reporting.

      •  Uh......... (4.00 / 6)

        You cannot cover politics and give to politicians, state, local or federal.

        If he didn't tell his editors, he should be fired. If he told his editors, they should be fired.

      •  In this case, they are. (none / 1)

        See the post with the pertinent WaPo's ethics section in this thread.

        Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

        by boadicea on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 04:47:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I'd be pissed (none / 1)

        If "fair and Balanced" meant shilling for the Democrats.

        I want the news to be the news.

        I want editorial opinion to be "informed" opinion. It is a complete diservice to print opinion without fact checking. And immoral to print lies as truth--even if it is just an opinion.

        And it is wrong to fail to identify the bias of the editorial opinion writer. I am tired of astroturf group OpAd pieces.

        I shouldn't have to research who/what is paying for the placement of the OpAd piece. I don't want them in my paper.

        In my book it is only a "witch hunt" if there is no witch.

    •  Oh Come ON (none / 1)

      At least let us fire a few warning shots across the bow of the Washington Post and Mr. Hsu.

      I thought the Omsbudsman's column was much too easy on them.  This story now has shown the Post to be doing a bad job of reporting twice:  first, for printing an obvious falsehood based on a statement from an anonymous source; and second, not revealing their reporter's own bias or finding out about the story.  I am starting to wonder whether the Post knows about  websites like Opensecrets.org or how to Google.

    •  It's not left or right-it's wrong (none / 1)

      for journalists of any stripe to contribute to political parties or campaigns. This restriction is spelled out in most newspaper codes of ethics. Supporting a party or candidate gives an explicit message to the readers that the journalist (and by extension, his/her employer) is biased and untrustworthy.  Even right-wing shills like Sean Hannity know this.  Hsu thumbed his nose at the public and at the Washington Post by making a public contribution.
  •  This guy is a reporter? (4.00 / 3)

    When I used to be a reporter at a public radio station in Michigan, I would have been in deep, deep trouble - if not fired - had I done what Mr. Hsu has apparently has. SHAME on the Washington Post! SHAME!
  •  letter sent (none / 1)

    to the omsbud.

    Here's to the LA times, for now. :)

  •  Bias? What's our other choice? (4.00 / 4)

    So the Post is saying no, we're not bias, we're just stupid and lazy. Thanks a lot. I'll keep that in mind next time I'm at the news stand.

    "Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere"

    by Morbo on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 04:24:00 PM PDT

  •  Tool. Water carrier. Propagandist. Whore. (4.00 / 6)

    Has anyone noticed how inadequate our language is to the Republican mob?  I swear, we have got to come up with some words that are meaningful.

    Change you can Xerox! Yes, we can!

    by DCDemocrat on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 04:27:08 PM PDT

  •  Carnacki! Welcome home!! (none / 1)

    Good diary, by the way.

    ...the White House will be adorned by a downright moron...H.L. Mencken

    by bibble on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 04:28:08 PM PDT

  •  Don't forget biased Jimmy V (4.00 / 3)

    Jim Vandehei works overtime to carry the H2O of GW and Co. Read his articles on Rovegate and last year's election. Hackery!!!

    Oh, and by the way, his wife is an ex-deLay staffer and a Bush appointee. Deputy Assistant Secretary for Human Services Legislation.

    He may not be on the Bush payroll, but someone in his family is, and Bush has ZERO tolerance for anything negative.

    It all adds up.

    You only regret the things you don't do.

    by DailyLife on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 04:28:42 PM PDT

    •  VandeHei is a nightmare! (4.00 / 2)

      Thanks for the background information on him!

      His bias is among the most obvious of all political "reporters."

      Check this out:

      VandeHei is uneasy about the missing explosives story. We haven't heard about it since the election. Republicans thought it was unfair. The Swift Boat stuff would have been unfair too if Kerry hadn't given `a convention speech entirely about being a war hero'. We put a lot of resources on debunking that. We should have focused on the Vietnam protests because that really made people feel icky.

      * * *

      There is a larger problem of media bias, though, where they run glowing stories about gays but treat Christians as freaks. `We're obsessed with gender diversity but not geographical diversity'.

      A liberal is a conservative who's been hugged.

      by raatz on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 08:32:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thanks for the link. (none / 0)

        I was unknowingly in his house when it was for sale (he lives in my neighborhood)

        The study was full of autographed pictures of DeLay and Henry Hyde, plus some of Dear Leader.

        When I got home I looked up who lived in the house, and was SHOCKED to see a WaPo reporter would have this crap in his study, and an leave it on the wall during on open house. (it sold)

        If he thinks bloggers were on his case before, now I actually know what his "house" is made of.  

        This will be like shootin' fish in a barrel.

        You only regret the things you don't do.

        by DailyLife on Tue Sep 13, 2005 at 07:19:49 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  He should be fired...and held up as an example (4.00 / 3)

    to all biased journalists.
  •  Welcome home Carnacki! (4.00 / 3)

    Good work.

    Let's remember to connect Hsu's water-carrying to the pisser who filled the chamber pot. Shouldn't we press for the name of the WH liar? I think it would be better to emphasize the pattern of WH smears, lies and manipulation, as well as the Fourth Estate's violation of the public trust. Just pointing a finger at Hsu is like Michael Brown's resignation. We can connect this to the Plame outing and Judith Miller's protection of her source of lies, and to the "Lies That Led to War."</rant>

  •  Just Curious (none / 1)

    Did this guy donate to Virginia Democrats as well?

    Given todays times, and the fact at hand, this guys was probably hedging his bets by going with the GOP.  And, like a true hack reporter covering the Bagelfest for the Mattoon, Illinois local rag, he's too in the bag or stupid to realize he's being used.

    I didn't know you could maintain active party interests and report.  This at the WP, geez.

    •  No. (none / 1)

      At least not during the 2002 or 2004 election cycle and in an amount equal to or greater $250.
    •  Wrong Question (none / 1)

      No political reporter, excluding opinion journalists, should be making any contributions to any political parties. It's unethical. If Hsu donated an equal amount to the Virginia Democratic Party he'd still be in the wrong because his contributions would be biased against potential third party challenges or against internal party challenges.

      Hsu screwed up. Twice, at least.

  •  Hello, Carnacki (none / 1)

    nice to see you. You have been missed

    On Hsu's donation: It's such an odd figure. Usually, you write a donation check in a full number--$100, or whatever. Makes me wonder if he made more than one donation.

    And while we're talking about WaPo folks married to political types, isn't Howie Kurtz's wife some kind of Republican functionary? Can we really expect any kind of unbiased follow-up from him?

    The degree to which you resist injustice is the degree to which you are free. -- Utah Phillips

    by Mnemosyne on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 04:59:27 PM PDT

  •  The least the WP should do is (none / 1)

    WP should print a disclaimer after every story Hsu "reports" to the effect that Hsu is a contributor to the Republican Party of Virginia. They should followed the model of the financial press in requiring their reporters to stay away or otherwise fully disclose their personal financial interests in the companies they report on. This is even required of "analysts" that recommend stocks in the media.
  •  What the *!#% did Spencer Hu learn in J-school? (4.00 / 2)

    I can tell you what I learned, back a quarter-century ago: because I was a local Dem operative, I could not cover either the Dems or the GOP in the state and local races. Instead, I was assigned the job of covering amendments to the Texas state constitution, which were considered nonpartisan.

    To have done otherwise would have been a conflict of interest. I guess Spencer Hu and his editors didn't learn that in J-school. Or, if they did, they thought they were special and didn't have to conform to a basic rule. This annoys me to no end.

    It also makes me glad that I didn't get the Bachelor of Journalism but instead dropped out of J-school in my last class and got the Bachelor of Arts in Government.

  •  WaPo says Open Secrets is Inaccurate (4.00 / 9)

    Take a look at Romenesko now.  The Washington Post says that it wasn't a contribution, but was reimbursement for a hotel room that the VA GOP had fronted for a hotel room in New York City, at the Republican National Convention in 2004.

    http://poynter.org/forum/default.asp?id=32178

    WaPo says this was just an error by the FEC in terms of how they classified the payment.

    The WaPo response goes on to include an article from the Richmond Times-Dispatch from 8/5/05, outlining how their reporters were also inaccurately reported as having contributed to the VA GOP.

    I think an update of this diary is in order.

    "In war: resolution. In defeat: defiance. In victory: magnanimity. In peace: goodwill." - Churchill

    by William S Martin on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 05:36:02 PM PDT

  •  My guess is that what they say (4.00 / 2)

    is probably true.  The interesting fact would be if the Virginia Republican Party bills journalists and such the actual cost of the room per their group discount (contracted out because they guarantee a certain # of rooms) or if they pocket a nice profit on the difference between the group rate and the published rack rate for the nights he stayed.

    Hmm.  Just a question from a curious hotel manager.

    What would Jesus Do? He would impeach Bush.

    (-6.75, -3.85)

    by mapKY on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 05:53:54 PM PDT

  •  An update is enought (4.00 / 3)

    I think that posting the correction clearly is enough.  After all, when WaPo makes untrue assertions in its paper it's out there for posterity, with the correction made later on where nobody notices it.  And Hsu is still a lazy, if not biased, reporter.  That fact hasn't changed.
  •  Wrong target (4.00 / 4)

    It is an understandable mistake, but one which might occur when a newspaper has completely lost the appearance of neutrality and appears to be both unprofessional and biased.

    The real fault is with the editorial management and the ownership of the newspaper.

    My recommendation to Armando and Markos is simple: just as you accuse George Bush for the faults of the Federal government you need to start realizing that the reason the WaPo allows anonymous sources to spread lies is because senior management allow it to occur.

    Therefore, you need to start targeting your criticism: who really is blame?  Is it Leonard Downie Jr., the executive editor? Or is it Donald Graham, the chairman of of WapoCo?

    Accusing Hsu of malfeasance is like blaming the Iraq war on some supply sergeant.

  •  Good job (4.00 / 3)

    with both the original diary and the update.
  •  FEC screwup? (4.00 / 3)

    Okay. Leave the diary so the post knows what a contrite retraction looks like.
  •  Incidental charges? (4.00 / 2)

    Maybe he rented a lot of porn in the hotel and had to pay it back out of his own pocket.
  •  you accused him and you were wrong (none / 1)

    so take down the accusation apologize and drop it. In his fact returning the money shows integrity, if not personal at least professional. Whether he was spreading GOP talking points is another issue.

    Who controls the past, controls the future. Who controls the present, controls the past. George Orwell

    by moon in the house of moe on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 06:27:18 PM PDT

  •  doesn't it usually work the other way around? (4.00 / 3)

    I thought that the hooker (or her pimp) pays up front for the hotel room, and that cost is then tacked onto the John's total bill.

    granted, I'm not speaking from experience or anything.

  •  Why don't you just delete this dairy? (none / 1)

    That makes sense, a lot of folks who recommended this dairy are probably watching MNF football. Just take it down, and allow another diary to take its place.

    The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in times of crisis, remain neutral.

    by ten10 on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 07:23:31 PM PDT

  •  FEC Record of this transaction is here (4.00 / 3)

    It looks like opensecrets.org reported the contribution exactly as it was filed. Here's the FEC record.

    If anyone wants to figure out how this "reimbursement" should have been filed by the Republican Party of Virginia, Inc., here are the instructions (PDF) about filing using this particular form.

    •  Thanks for this....the error is with VA GOP (4.00 / 2)

      not with the information provided in Opensecrets.org.

      Too many voices here condemning opensecrets.org is irritating. The WaPo and the VA GOP both know the rules and the filing requirements.

      I still think this diary should be recommended......and the WaPo and it's reporter condemned for embedding itself with the politicos of VA GOP.

      Impeachment...if it's still off the table, can we at least kick it around the floor a bit? AnnieJo

      by SallyCat on Mon Sep 12, 2005 at 09:23:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I recommended... (none / 1)

    ...before I unrecommended. I feel so dirty, now.
  •  Carnacki (none / 1)

    I unrecommended.  :-(  I felt awful doing it.
  •  OK (none / 1)

    Granted the reporter was playing by the rules.  The real question is:

    Virginia reporters who covered the Democratic National Committee in Boston last summer didn't stay at the same hotel as the Virginia delegation and paid their hotel directly.

    Why aren't the Dems smart enough to arrange the hotel rooms for local press people??

  •  Talk about Hsu, Repubs, and reimbursement! (none / 0)

    Check out this little chestnut of an audio file interview / story from the creepy water-carrier Hsu about Homeland Security funds allocated for DC being used instead to cover the security costs for W's second inaugural.