So NRO wants the Bush Administration to withdraw the New York Times' press credentials over the Times' story about, well, about every critical story they've written about the administration, I guess. Would that be so very bad?
Froomkin has a nice take on the story in his column today about the right wing's on-going conniption fit over the Times' outing the administration's apparently illegal spy work. The NRO editorial, which calls for those traitors at the times being denied White House press credentials, is linked by both Froomkin and the folks over at HuffPost. Froomkin suggests the Times' losing their credentials might not be the worst thing in the world, and I agree. But not because I think they ought to lose them, but because I think the press has been so devalued by this administration.
After watching many, many press gaggles and reading transcripts of more of them, I've come to the conclusion that if I was an assignment editor for any major news organization, I certainly wouldn't make my star enterprise reporters sit in that room for little or no reason. Granted, they need some sort of presence there, but that could come in the person of a bright intern. Meanwhile, Helen Thomas could be installed as the permanent pool reporter, since she seems to be the only one who ever pursues issues looking for an actual, serious answer to the questions she asks.
While the interns and Helen were grilling Tony Snow, all that high priced reporting talent we catch glimpses of on the nightly news could actually be doing some reporting instead of trying to copy down the administration's daily talking points.
At the local level, daily and weekly newspaper reporters--the men and women who dig up the news about your local school board or village government--wouldn't put up with being treated the way the White House Press Corps is, and neither would their editors. They couldn't afford to. If they were getting the nonsense that passes for answers at White House press gaggles and 'briefings,' they'd find some other way to get the news.
But perhaps that's because out here in the hinterland we're still pretty sure what news is and what it isn't. Illegal spying on American's phone conversations? News. Bill and Hillary's sex life? Not news. Maybe some of those D.C. journalistic hotshots ought to do some local newspaper interning of their own to gain a little perspective on what they really ought to be doing.