By Andrew Feinberg
I’m writing this from my home office in downtown D.C., from which I can reach either the White House or the Capitol in 10 minutes if I had to. I’ve been thinking about this for a few days now, and I think it’s important I make it clear, especially in the wake of my last column on the FTC and blogging disclosure, where I stand on ethics in media.
I am a journalist by profession. That is to say I am by and large a "reporter" of news. The kind of dry, objective stuff you read here when it’s been pulled from BroadbandCensus.com with my byline. The kind of no-frills, just-the-facts-ma’am reporting that was taught to me by old pros, and the kind of journalism that has been the gold standard around the world for many years.
Traditional, "boots on the ground" journalism is important to me because I believe the war for truth can be only by foot soldiers armed with pen, notepad, voice recorder, and camera. You fight with every question, every snap of the shutter, and every line of copy filed.
But I also love what, for lack of a better term, I will call blogging. I got my start in journalism as a blogger. Not ideological, but provocative. I made a name for myself by being fair, asking pointed questions, and documenting the answers, either via audio, print, or photograph.
It is because of the opportunity blogging gave me that I was able to appear on C-SPAN last week. It’s blogging that first got me noticed, and convinced a risk-averse, old-school, ink-stained editor to give a twenty-something with no training a chance to learn the craft of hard-news journalism from people far more experienced than I, in a newsroom I had little business being in.
And bloggers (note: NOT CITIZEN JOURNALISTS) are doing exciting things. Josh Marshall won a Polk award for his work at Talking Points Memo. Andrew Sullivan (love him or hate him) has used the medium to become one of the most read political writers in the world. While Woodward and Bernstein brought down a president, some might claim it was bloggers who brought down Dan Rather — and the "voice of god" evening newscast format.
(Note to the reader: I hate the term ‘blogger’ with the fire of a thousand suns. I think it is too often used as a pejorative that artificially separates journalists who happen to write for the web from those who write for ink. I’ve always explained that I consider myself a writer and journalist first and foremost, just one who might happen to publish on a WordPress or Movable Type platform. But for simplicity’s sake, I’ll stick to saying blogger, because 99 percent of people know what I mean).
Some bloggers are "boots on the ground" journalists. The hardworking, though sometimes controversial bunch at Politico come to mind. And some bloggers are not only great investigators, but do a wonderful job of tirelessly aggregating content to tell a story.
One recent standout has been The Huffington Post’s Nico Pitney, who has been live-blogging the recent unrest in Iran. Mr. Pitney has been collecting information from twitter, facebook and all sorts of feeds across the web and putting it in one place for all to see. I wonder at times how he has managed to sleep.
Someone at the White House noticed Mr. Pitney, too. During President Obama’s press conference last week, the President broke with the tradition of taking the first few questions from the major wire services (AP, Reuters, Agence France-Presse), then the T.V. networks, then the large circulation magazines, and so on. After the traditional first question from the A.P., President Obama (after a strangely awkward introduction) called on Mr. Pitney, who asked a question that he said he sourced from an Iranian via the Internet.
Needless to say, the "Old Media" outrage machine roared. First they called Mr. Pitney a plant in the mold of Jeff Gannon James Guckert, the "reporter" for GOP-funded Talon News who became notorious as a go-to "softball" for President Bush. These comparisons were quickly dropped, but the outrage continued when it was made public that Mr. Pitney was contacted by the White House in advance of the press conference to let him know he might get a question.
This isn’t uncommon. Nor is it unusual for bloggers to gain entry to the White House press room. My friend Garrett Graff was the first such blogger. His "day pass" is on display at Washington’s Newseum.
In fact, almost any reporter or blogger can get a "day pass" to a White House briefing, even when lacking a Congressional press pass that enables one to get a "hard pass" to the White House (something Pitney’s HuffPost colleagues Sam Stein and Ryan Grimm — both hard-news journalists, posess). It’s easier to get accessto the White House than it is to the Congressional press galleries — something many "transparency" advocates don’t seem to care about, even though Sunlight Foundation’s Open House Project called for a solution to this problem back in 2007.
So Mr. Pitney being there was not a problem in and of itself. In fact, it’s not even unusual for some media to get a "heads up" that they may be called on, as Time’s Mark Halperin notes.
And therein lies the real problem.
There are those who would point to an overly-cozy relationship between HuffPost and the White House. Mr. Stein was among the first journalists to get a question at President Obama’s maiden news conference. And for that, there was much grumbling among the old guard — myself included.
It takes years for some reporters to get the chance to cover a president. My friend Olivier Knox covered the Bush presidency for Agence France-Presse, and that assignment came after years in the trenches of Congress and other less desirable assignments.
The tradition of calling on the major wire services is one that recognizes their role as sources for newspapers around the world who can’t get their own people in the room. Similarly, the TV networks are the window to the world for many Americans. These institutions have built up a following and a reputation for excellence over many, many years. They’ve earned their place at the front of the line because of their wide presence and credibility.
This isn’t to say that The Huffington Post’s core reporters, such as Messrs. Stein and Grimm (Mr. Grimm is the site’s lead Congressional correspondent) lack talent or integrity. Nor do I intend to impugn the character of Mr. Pitney, either.
I don’t always agree with some of the bloggers on the site. And I dislike both the way celebrity opinion blogs are mixed in on the front page with original reporting, and with A.P. wire copy — and how the site is (in my opinion) downright cluttered and ugly.
But by and large, I admire what the folks there are trying to do. I just wish they’d separate out their news and opinion better. I believe that wall is sacred. It’s ok to write a column and still report news. But you’d better make it clear to your readers what it is that you’re doing, and when.
For instance, my columns appear here on SiliconAngle, and only here. Never on BroadbandCensus.com, for which I report on Congress and FCC actions on telecommunications and technology. And when SiliconAngle syndicates one of my 
news reports (or a report from one of my BroadbandCensus colleagues) it is always prefaced with an editor’s note explaining where it comes from and that it is news, not opinion or analysis.
Ok, so where did Mr. Pitney go wrong?
He answered the phone.
All this controversy could have been avoided had Mr. Pitney simply said to the White House staffer on the other end of the line: "I don’t think it’s appropriate for us to be having this conversation. Good day to you, sir." and simply hung up the phone. Then immediately reported on his blog that the White House had called him.
In legal circles, a communication between a judge and a litigant without the presence of the other party is called ex parte, and in most circumstances is highly improper and unethical. Lawyers and judges are duty-bound to report ex parte communications that occur during a trial, or they could face serious sanction. I see no reason why an ethical journalist shouldn’t follow the same rough path in this kind of case.
If Mr. Pitney had followed that sort of ethical guide, no one could have cast aspersions on Mr. Pitney for being a "plant" — though I do feel the White House should refrain from tipping off reporters. They should have a question ready, or be able to think on their feet, or they should get another job.
But Presidents always play games. Journalists, be they "old school" reporters or live-blogging real time scribes like Mr. Pitney, should maintain a professional distance. It’s natural to be skeptical of politicians. But when journalists allow themselves to be manipulated, even with the best of intentions, they risk being judged as skeptically as those they cover.
RSS
Email
twitter
Chris Anderson. You need to appreciate that not all people want their content to be the same as everyone else’s. When things are free for everyone, we do not have that choice. The Wall Street Journal will ALWAYS be able to charge people for content, so long as that content provides their readers with a competitive advantage for their jobs. If money is an exclusive barrier that makes subscribers part of a club others can’t afford, they’ll pay for it. People like the exclusivity that money affords them. Just ask the people who actually venture to TED to see you. If it makes me money, saves me more time, or makes me happier than what I can get for free, charge me money. Apple does it and it works just splendidly for them.
Malcolm Gladwell. You need to acknowledge that the web crashes barriers. Web hosting is DISGUSTINGLY CHEAP unlike print. The best thing the New Yorker could do to preserve itself is to kill its presses, go web-based, and hire bloggers who fit their style. As soon as you launch a paid subscription, someone else will come up with a cheaper or free subscription with something similar, and it can be just as good and paid for by ads. Maybe they’ll even go user generated and just hire some editor who is brilliant but lives in his mom’s basement. Seth is right. You need to learn to leverage the web better.
Seth Godin. “In a world of free, everyone can play.” True, but not everyone can win, or even stay afloat. Free IS a relatively cheap way to get attention, but not always able to keep that attention. People want content to do certain things for them. If the free stuff doesn’t do it, they’ll pay for something else.
