There are countless news publications dedicated to "insider" political information, a commodity that, if done well, is supposed to cater to various pols and wonks who meticulously follow action inside the Beltway. But when it comes to the on-line reporting from Politico, there appears to be a growing divide between insider fantasy and reality.
I've watched as certain Politico reporters have written inaccurate information, usually citing a wide array of anonymous "officials" to push whatever agenda or narrative the writers want. In one instance, a Politico scribe actually posted incendiary documents accusing supporters of the Democratic Party of referring to working people as "idiots." The documents were later found to be complete bunk originating from Republican operatives, with no clarification from the reporter and no correction from Politico.
And now comes a recent Politico report about the Obama administration's decision to postpone its planned June 8 immigration meeting to discuss comprehensive immigration reform by about a week due to scheduling conflicts, according to the White House. The meeting is set to be a convergence of both bipartisan members of Congress and immigration rights groups to discuss moving forward with comprehensive immigration reform in the near future. But, if we're to take Politico's reporting as accurate, the meeting is merely "a show," a "smokescreen," and "not smart politics."
Who say so? Why anonymous "aides" of course!
In an on-line piece titled "Grumbles over immigration meeting" Politico tries to insinuate, rather abruptly, that the Obama administration's immigration meeting is a total farce, meant to somehow appease Latino voters while offering no solutions.
Throughout the Politico article, there is not one person who goes on the record. Not one. There are only two sources, Republican and Democratic "senior aides," who are both anonymous:
"This is not smart politics for the administration as far as Hill relations go because this is not going to be a Democrat versus Republican debate," one senior Democratic aide said. "They will need more than just their ‘friends’ to support them."
...
Why invite yourself to a party?" said one senior GOP aide, whose boss had been involved in recent immigration debates.
The aide suggested the White House might be using the meeting as a "smokescreen to cover Obama’s campaign promise," giving proponents of immigration reform a symbolic victory, but not necessarily making a good-faith push to pass legislation.
There are many problems with this.
Who's to say who these aides actually are? Do they work in the White House? Do they work in Congress? The article is purposely vague on that point, meaning that these sources, who have a variety of political agendas to push, could very well not know what they're talking about, not being privy to the White Houses' discussions on immigration.
And even if the Obama immigration meeting is just seen as a sham, why can't Politico get someone with a real name to actually say that?
There's no doubt that reporters sometimes have to use anonymous sources, but that's usually utilized as a last resort to protect said sources from losing their jobs or being punished in other ways. But Politico only appears to be using the anonymity blanket to push a specific agenda to discredit the Obama administration on immigration, with no actual facts, consensus, or on-the-record evidence to back up their claims.
This is at the same time as local immigration, labor and faith groups are converging in Washington D.C. this week as part of the Reform Immigration for American coalition, to kick off a historical campaign for comprehensive immigration reform that would provide an eventual path to citizenship for the millions of undocumented immigrants who already work and pay taxes in the United States.
It's easy to get any attention-starved "aide" to say what you want them to say, and Politico's current reporting on immigration only exemplifies the worst kind of journalism, a journalism that is meant to muddy the waters with distortions and ultimately sabotage true progress on the immigration issue.
(Cross-posted on Gabacha.com)