I feel like I have Gannon/Guckert on the brain. I've mentioned before in another diary (as well as in comments) that I really don't have an issue with Guckert himself - rather, I see him as representative of a bigger issue and problem with this Administration as well as with the press.
Those of you who have seen my diaries have also seen my recent efforts to track mentions of the Guckert issue in the MSM. That means that every day I am going through a ton of information online trying to see if there's a substantive (or even brief) mention of the Guckert issue. It makes me necessarily connected to what is and is not being covered. Read on.
This is what has led me to finally write a letter to the editor of The Washington Post
. I'm not foolish enough to think it will do any good, especially not if a very few letters on the subject are received. Editorial space seems to be allocated based on the number of letters an editor receives on any given subject. Only a few letters and the subject is not likely to be raised. A slew of letters and it's more likely to be covered.
Here's what I sent. I tried to keep it very short as that is also a determining factor in getting it published.
Exclusive to The Washington Post
To the Editor:
I am disgusted by The Washington Post's appalling lack of coverage of the James Guckert/Talon News issue. The press plays an integral role as a legitimate check on those in power, and, arguably, none more so than The Washington Post.
The questions that The Washington Post should be asking are quite simple and need not become embroiled in the more salacious details of the backstory. They are: What are the procedures for obtaining a White House press security clearance? What are the standards for determining who is legitimate press and who is not? Who made the determination that Talon News was a "legitimate" news organization and on what basis? How can an individual with a criminal past be allowed such close proximity to the President of the United States in a post-9/11 era?
At the beginning, a few of these questions were asked and never answered. Rather than let the issue simply drop off the radar screen, I would have expected The Washington Post, in the spirit of unbiased investigative journalism, to pursue those answers. In light of your apparent lack of willingness to explore this issue and its related questions, it is no surprise to me that many people believe the mainstream press is hopelessly compromised by the corporate entities that own them. I would have expected better of a venerated publication such as The Washington Post.
I followed the specific guidelines available on The Washington Post's website when I submitted this so it wouldn't be excluded on procedural grounds.
If you're comfortable, I encourage each of you to write your major newspapers in a similar vein. Take the high ground and stick to the relevant questions as you see them. Most importantly, keep it short - that was the most difficult part for me.
If we don't do something this is going to continue to drop from public light and will fade into the background as yet another non-issue forgotten by the mainstream press.