The Washington Post Thought It Might Be Nice To Provide Free Book Marketing To Insurrectionist Josh Hawley
from the zero-accountability dept
Let's be clear about something. The U.S. doesn't really do "accountability" particularly well. It's a major reason why we often repeat the same mistakes over and over again without learning much from history or experience. That's been made particularly clear by a U.S. press that continues to not only platform the insurrectionists who spread election fraud lies leading to the violent events of January 6, but treats these lies as valid and meaningful opinions. That, understandably, has led to concerns that it's going to happen again. But worse.
Case in point is the Washington Post, which this week decided, for whatever reason, to give Senator Josh Hawley oodles of free publicity for his latest book. Washington Post Live hosted Hawley as part of a chat, providing him ample free marketing for his book complaining about the "tyranny of big tech" (tyrannically sold by Amazon, and heavily marketed by Hawley on Twitter). Not only that, the Post couldn't be bothered to craft an accurate bio for Hawley, instead using the one provided by his publicist that paints Hawley in an aggressively inauthentic light:
Not too surprisingly, the Post marketing doesn't really bother to inform readers that Hawley's anti-monopolist credentials are largely nonexistent. Like most of the GOP, it's literally impossible to find an instance where Hawley, for example, so much as criticized a telecom monopoly. And, like most of the press, it's rare you'll find outlets like the Washington Post pointing out that a primary platform of the GOP for forty fucking years has been to encourage monopolization, whether we're talking about telecom, airlines, banking, or countless other marginally competitive and largely broken U.S. business sectors.
The GOP isn't engaged in histrionics over "big tech" because it genuinely cares about monopolization or unchecked corporate power. Decades of policy history make it abundantly clear that's not remotely true.
The GOP is angry at big tech because a handful of social media companies belatedly started policing disinformation and race-baiting, cornerstones of party power and recruitment in the face of an aging, sagging, and shifting electorate. There are plenty of very valid criticisms of "big tech," but the U.S. press seems incapable of acknowledging that many of the GOP's concerns on this front aren't entirely in good faith.
NYU journalism professor Jay Rosen has long lamented the U.S. media's obsession with the "view from nowhere," and how this undermines accountability while letting bad actors off the hook. Rosen wasn't particularly impressed with the Post offering free book marketing to a guy who just got done spending months filling the American public's heads with dangerous fluff and nonsense, and shows absolutely nothing that could be mistaken as contrition in the wake of January 6:
Still puzzling over this invite from the Post to Josh Hawley. https://t.co/Yf2FIZz03o (And check out the glowing press release they printed as a bio.) I keep trying to envision a way it could go well, and... man, that is hard. Won't say impossible, but it's difficult to imagine.
— Jay Rosen (@jayrosen_nyu) May 3, 2021
Even if you just want to ignore that Hawley's anti-corporate power and anti-monopolist credentials are nonexistent, it shouldn't be that hard to see how treating Hawley's (read: Trump's) lies as valid can easily help undermine accountability for recent attacks on democracy. And while the Post did challenge Hawley somewhat on his role in the insurrection, the very act of free marketing and platforming Hawley then gives him ample opportunity to muddy the waters and distort his actual role in triggering the events of January 6, which he happily proceeded to do:
The problem was the same one you see on Sunday shows. The guest can turn on his fog machine, lose most of the audience in hand-to-hand combat over important but arcane details, and run out the clock when the push back comes. This is what Hawley did with "election integrity." 2/
— Jay Rosen (@jayrosen_nyu) May 4, 2021
Rosen wasn't the only media scholar to take issue with the Post's decision to give Hawley's book free marketing in the wake of his attacks on democracy:
The @washingtonpost's Live programming falls under the newsroom and "are an extension of our journalism."
So why is it describing Josh Hawley in the glowing terms of his publisher's PR?
A journalistic description might, er, describe him differently.https://t.co/u46kvL6ZaN pic.twitter.com/KnyHglLljg
— Joshua Benton (@jbenton) May 3, 2021
Comedians routinely critical of the U.S. press also took issue with the Post's decision to provide free book marketing to Hawley:
Are staffers at the @washingtonpost saying anything about their newspaper platforming and promoting Josh Hawley's book after he incited an insurrection and propagated the biggest lie in American history about a stolen election to brainwash millions of people? pic.twitter.com/BZ3BATvHi9
— Matt Negrin, HOST OF HARDBALL AT 7PM ON MSNBC (@MattNegrin) May 3, 2021
Of course the folks most in need of hearing and understanding this message, didn't hear it at all. In reality, Hawley has been facing nonexistent to very light accountability for lying repeatedly about the 2020 election results, which put the very fabric of democracy at risk. But for the "cancel culture" set the very act of questioning the Post's failures of accountability and journalistic standards is itself somehow viewed as "censorship":
Karl Bode: anti-conservative bias in tech doesn’t exist...
Also Karl Bode: gonna retweet this Daily Show dude and pressure journalists to not cover a newsworthy book by a prominent conservative senator. pic.twitter.com/jodhS1xCqM
— Will Upton (@wupton) May 3, 2021
Again, light accountability for lying about the results of an election is not "censorship." And criticizing someone for spreading lies that put elected officials' lives at risk shouldn't be seen as "conservative." One major reason America keeps stumbling through the same issues over and over without learning anything from the experience is because for the ad-based, impression-obsessed U.S. press. It's more profitable to heavily market Hawley and enjoy the resulting controversy than it is to do the right thing and not platform his dangerous lies at all. The age-old internet concept "don't feed the trolls" isn't adhered to because adhering to it harms profits.
That doesn't mean the Post shouldn't cover him when he does something of note (like being the only Senator to vote against a hate crime bill protecting Asian Americans), but they don't need to be helping him sell a book five months after his lies contributed to numerous human deaths, normalizing his behavior and setting an ugly precedent for something even worse just over the horizon.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: big tech, censorship, insurrection, josh hawley, journalism, news coverage, platforming, promotion
Companies: washington post
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
At this point, hearing Republicans stump for full-bore fascism wouldn’t surprise me. That glorified death cult already believes elections they lose aren’t “real” elections.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You mean they haven't been doing that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Republican lawmakers and leaders still make overtures to the principles democracy — after all, they haven’t (yet) banned people not registered as Republicans from voting. But Republican voters are either aching to support or already support Republican-led fascism.
I mean, the whole point of the insurrection was to depose a legally elected president-elect and put in his place the legally certified loser of the 2020 election. That’s straight-up fascist behavior.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
No, the opportunity window of fascism is to stop the election from happening. After that, it becomes insurrection and rebellion. Denying that an election happened is more like pretend-fascism.
Could have been a coup except that the military was exceptionally clear that it was not going to be game for that, making several public announcements that they were not going to help overthrowing the elected government.
Ok, let's upgrade to wannabe-fascism.
Bad enough as a political goal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
" after all, they haven’t (yet) banned people not registered as Republicans from voting."
Not for lack of trying. They have spent decades of gerrymandering, voter suppression, etc. doing just that, they just haven't been able to come right out and say that's what they've been trying to do yet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
No, but they are trying hard to stage a coup, In December, Oregon State Representative Mike Nearman (R), was caught on camera opening a locked door of the state Capitol to let far-right demonstrators, some carrying rifles and bear mace, into the building.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I am not convinced he isn't representing his electorate here.
Republicans are seeing that their firebrands by far receive the most small-donor donations, and they try accommodating that trend.
I half suspect that it's just that Putin is good at restructuring small payments, and frankly: if he wants to destroy the U.S., that would be a whole lot more effective use of money than building nukes.
Particularly since after a bit of initial investments, the operation can be run on empty promises fairly well, as opposed to nuclear armament.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And as the Redhatted brownshirts use pipebombs to burn down the offices of the Washington Post, the Editorial staff will take to social media bemoaning the fact that people whose rise to power they enabled out of an insane sense of 'fairness' don't actually care about fairness, free speech, nevermind freedom of the press, they're just useful tools to get beliefs that have been thoroughly discredited by history platformed and given an undue appearance of being legitimate.
'How were we to know that enabling the people who hate anything to the left of pinochet and have been threatening, and committing, terrorist could possibly lead to bloodshed? Hawley was elected to office, republicans would never put someone dangerously unfit in office aside from all the times they did.'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You mean the "Leopard Eating Faces" party they enabled would eat their face also and they'd take it as a complete surprise?
It'd be a steep price to pay for putting up that clickbait, I'm sure. But hardly surprising.
Also not way out there. I keep coming back to the fact that 30% of the US citizenry is on board with these asshats. Hitler made his takeover of power work with just 12%.
The US is one bad recession - or crisis, real or imagined - away from tipping right over the brink.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kinda gave the game away there
If calls for accountability and not providing a platform and bullhorn to insurrectionists to speak with are evidence of 'anti-conservative bias' then that says a lot about what counts as 'conservative' these days, probably far more than he thought his statement did.
'Accountability is anti-conservative(at least when applied to us), how dare you call for consequences for our actions!?'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Time for a new party
I propose the slogan "Republicans in deed only".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Time for a new party
Yeah but RIDO just sounds like you've got a cold...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Must Have Been A Great Interview
I have to wonder how badly the Amazon Post is hemorrhaging cash, if they're willing to stir up the pot in exchange for some readership. I'm not really hearing anything wrong with the talk that he gave, only character assassination for past policy disagreements. I guess the leftists don't want a free press; they just want an echo chamber, even if it drives them into bankruptcy again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Must Have Been A Great Interview
'Past policy disagreements', you mean like whether or not people who win free and fair elections should be allowed to take power? Whether or not it's right for far right mobs he's helped to stir up to storm the capitol and murder police officers in the hopes of being able to do the same to their political opponents?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A given newspaper has no obligation to print “both sides” of an argument or give space to fascist bullshit and the people who spew it. The Washington Post can be part of a free press without giving Josh Hawley — someone who implicitly supported the cause of the violent insurrectionists by raising/supporting baseless objections to the 2020 election results — space within its pages.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
'Some people think vaccines have microchips, here's their side.'
That's crazy talk that is, what's next, arguing that serious newspapers shouldn't print plague cultists and/or flat earth screeds, despite the fact that balance clearly requires that they print both if they are to be taken seriously?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Must Have Been A Great Interview
You must be referring to his Hitler impression outside of the capital building, trying to rile up the plebs just before they started their violent storming of the capital in support of an insurrection, encouraged by Trump himself?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Must Have Been A Great Interview
"I have to wonder how badly the Amazon Post is hemorrhaging cash..."
Well that one's ripped straight from the Trump Twitter feed...
"I guess the leftists don't want a free press..."
Deciding not to publish the words of a lying, fascist insurrectionist is the definition of a free press. Deciding to criticize press who do publish the words of a lying, fascist insurrectionist is the definition of free speech. Why do you hate freedom so much Koby?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Must Have Been A Great Interview
"Why do you hate freedom so much Koby?"
Because what Koby is pushing is that anything not describing the "real" narrative of the white man being pushed from his supremacy throne must be Lügenpresse - or the US translation of Goebbel's old talking point - "Fake News".
It became clear, quite quickly, that Koby is just the "rational" frontrunner trying to make space for his less civilized stormfront peers.
A phenomenon bar owners are used to seeing; when a well-spoken and reasonable person walks in wearing a swastika to sound out the waters and see if that bar is a good new place for the like-minded to gather.
Most bar owners today know damn well that either they toss that guy out on his ear at once or a month later that bar will be a nazi bar.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not all conservatives are assholes.
Stop pretending that the reason the leaders of the insurrection are being "picked on" is because THEY CREATED A FUCKING INSURRECTION!
They are so quick to pull out the zomg they only did this because I'm conservative & the masses run to protect some of the largest assholes even they can't stand because conservative.
Hawley has come out against the 1st Amendment in action & deed while screaming he believes in the Constitution & anyone trying to call him out is pounced upon by the conservatives he summons screaming they only attacked him because he is a conservative not because he is a worthless human.
I'm still waiting for him to apologize for all of those conservative insurrectionists who stormed the capitol. I mean he expects all Muslims to apologize for the actions of others they don't even know & were not involved in. Hawley cheered them on to storm the capitol... not a freaking peep.
Its a pity that the Post is on the bandwagon of everything is destroying print news while doing shit like this...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
he expects all Muslims to apologize for the actions of others they don't even know & were not involved in.
Funny thing about that: Lots of Muslims have been denouncing the actions of Muslim groups engaged in terrorism the entire time, only the bigger outlets never run with those stories. I guess it's so the anti-Muslim crowd can keep making this (stupid to begin with) claim that they do not.
And that's despite the fact we've all been living under Sharia Law since Clinton and whatever i can't run with this ridiculous nonsense any further.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
It's always worth reminding people that the vast proportion of Muslims are not Muslim extremists. I mean the name is a bit of a clue...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Well, but it doesn't help that Salafism is a major brand under the label of Islam, just like Trumpism is a major brand under the label of conservativism. That a significant part of the brand is just retained as a rallying cry and for claiming more encompassing support for your ideology that you actually can rely on...
Who minds? Certainly not the people cheered by the largest inauguration crowd in history.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
"...only the bigger outlets never run with those stories."
Hell, one thing known in the middle east which is in the west completely unknown. Even Iran issued a fatwah on ISIS, with the chief poo-bahs of Shi'ite Islam all condemning the "new caliphate" as blasphemers and apostates, very early on.
It's a bit of a problem that in the US the "conservatives" screaming about the constitution all the time tend to condemn every amendment except the 2nd while hosting a particular hatred for freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
It's not that impressive that the Shia are condemning the Sunnis. If other Sunnis did it too, that's more encouraging.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I expect the book to be just another meaningless collection of the Greatest Hits of Republican Talking Points to be read by people who have heard it all a million times. Not Mr. Original Thought, him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Washington Post, wtf are you doing?
Why are you wasting space and time with this kind of shit? I still have respect for you, but it’s waning when I heard about this stuff. I am genuinely confused to why give one of, if not the biggest Conservative asshole(s) on Capitol Hill (who is partly responsible for the Insurrection four months ago) his own space in the Washington Post. That’s like the New York Times accepting an interview with Adolf Hitler about his Final Solution. These things should not be compatible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thanks Karl
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kinda snuggles right up next to what I said in https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210430/00075246706/hollywood-lobbyists-so-afraid-any-public-bene fit-intellectual-property-that-theyre-trying-to-block-covid-vaccine-sharing.shtml#c65
Too bad for me that I didn't think to mention the profit motive just then. Nice finishing touch Karl, thanks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
WaPo is bad, yet they somehow manage to still be exponentially more objective than the Newsweek opinion section. I'll just continue freeloading articles from them in my incognito tabs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the bio is true
Josh Hawley battled Organized Crime.
Thats because he's Bat(Shit Insane)Man
[ link to this | view in chronology ]