City Paper is not for tourists
Big news of the weekend is that someone is finally standing up for Redskins Owner Daniel Snyder. Who would so such a thing, you ask? Could it be spokesperson Karl Swanson? Nah, that wouldn’t merit the first item in City Desk’s much-acclaimed Weekend in Review feature. Could it be fellow sports mogul Ted Leonsis? Nah, why would he put himself out there after all that’s been written about Snyder.
Since the suspense is by now killing you, I’ll let it fly. It’s Washington Post Metro columnist Robert McCartney, the too-often overly evenhanded Robert McCartney. Titled “A Look at the Dan Snyder You Don’t Hear So Much About,” the piece talks about how Snyder’s charity has given boatloads of money to organizations that help children. Here’s the columnist’s take:
I’m not defending his management of the team, and I realize he shares his wealth partly out of self-interest to improve his image in the community. Nevertheless, a string of people whom I interviewed last week praised Snyder for being sincerely considerate and benevolent and said the toxic reputation he’s acquired is incomplete and misleading.
This is a classic case of betcha journalism—-as in, I’ll betcha you can’t write a favorable column about Dan Snyder. And so, you go ahead and try to find something good about him. As a strategy for columnizing, it’s a good one. Everyone wants to read the contrarian take, everyone wants to see if you can make the asshole look the part of a genius, and everyone wants to hate on you for even trying.
Yet McCartney should have gone further. He should have focused, say, on London Fletcher, a good free-agent pickup. He should have noted that after the Post exposed the lawsuits against season ticket holders this season, the team moderated its behavior. He should have pushed the argument till it burst at the seams.
Speaking of things Snyder-related, how ’bout that Skins game? After having ended Detroit’s losing skid, how glorious would it have been for the Skins to have ended another streak this year, only in a fashion that boosts the team, not deflates it? Well, just like the last couple of Skins games, a great outcome just barely slipped through their hands, or slipped wide of the uprights, as the case may be.
DCist has a little post on a nasty NW fire mid-weekend.
Washington Times posts AP story giving context to the Salahi drama. Dropping in unannounced on the prez was once a time-honored tradition, goes the report: “Americans staked their claim to the White House in muddy boots on fine carpet, picnicked on the grounds, parked their carriages and then their cars outside and tromped inside to look for the man, often finding him. They did not need invitations, engraved or otherwise.”
Congratulations to Post Ombo Andy Alexander for staying on the story of the Washington Post and its historically lax corrections practices. In this iteration, Alexander nails the paper for taking forever to print simple corrections. It’s all a legacy going back to the Ben Bradlee years and perhaps beyond—-a stubborn refusal to admit you’re wrong. It lingers. Here’s one example cited by AA:
— A photo caption identified an officer as being in the Coast Guard. A reader pointed out that he was in the Navy. A correction ran, but more than 10 weeks later.