The hundreds of readers' responses (845 so far) to the Washington Post's decision to fire Dan Froomkin ("White House Watch") have been overwhelmingly negative. Although the odds seem slender-to-none that WaPo's neocon cheerleader Fred Hiatt will change his mind (and even if he does, part of me hopes that Froomkin would tell him to stuff it), comments are still being accepted in response to the Ombudsman's lame defense of the decision.
Let WaPo know what you think of their decision here, especially in light of the fact that they've once again given Wolfowitz a place to promulgate his neocon nonsense alongside the rest of the right-wing mouthpieces.
Here is what I wrote earlier today in response to the Ombudsman's palaver:
As with the overwhelming majority of those who have commented here, I find this decision illogical and fraught with bias. I visit WaPo because its arts & living section happens to carry the handful of comic strips I enjoy. I come also because of Dan Froomkin's blog (I read Eugene Robinson's column via other sites).
Unlike George Will's opinion pieces, Dan's work is always solidly fact-based. Unlike Charles Krauthammer, Dan has shined a spotlight on the wrongdoing and shenanigans of both occupants of the White House. (It was not Dan's fault that Mr Bush's administration was the source of so much that is at variance with America's core values, just as it is not Dan's fault that President Obama seems to be going astray thus far in several key areas as well. For the former, Dan was often one of the very few voices who insisted on exposing wrongdoing. For the latter, he has consistently shown his adherence to core principles, rather than to personality.)
I can find another way to read my comics. I will continue to read Dan Froomkin, wherever he lands. And don't think I hadn't noticed that the online interface to see Tom Toles's work was changed fairly recently, making it a several-click, rather than one-click operation to be able to see his cartoons. Was this done deliberately as well, given his "liberal" (i.e. truthful, hard-hitting) bent? I will look for Mr Toles's work elsewhere as well.
What a rankly stupid decision. What a dishonest piece of work this "explanation" is— for shame. Shame on Fred Hiatt and the rest of the partisan ideologues infesting the WaPo board at the expense of good reporting and honest analysis. Goodbye.
Don't let them axe Froomkin without clearly understanding what the consequences are. I predict they will not revisit their decision, but Fred Hiatt et al. should have utterly no way to excuse themselves in front of their shareholders should they try to say, "We had no idea Froomkin was so popular."
Pathetic and disgraceful. WaPo fully deserves to go the way of the dinosaurs GOPosaurs.