Dept. of Media

Playing Center John Solomon is pushing evenhandedness at the Washington Times.

Styles of the Times: Solomon strips loaded language from Moonie paper.
Darrow Montgomery

On Jan. 28, former AP and Washington Post reporter John Solomon took over as executive editor of the Washington Times. In his first weeks on the job, he hosted several coffees with staffers to hear their thoughts and communicate his vision for the paper.

Among the anecdotes he told his peers is this one: One day, a colleague approached him and asked, “Are you one of us?”

The question took Solomon by surprise. He spat out an answer that went something along the lines of: Well, I’m a journalist.

Had Solomon undergone his official Washington Times Ideological Litmus Test?

At least two of Solomon’s colleagues took away that message. Solomon won’t talk about private newsroom discussions, but says, “If anyone in the newsroom has any perception that there should be any litmus-testing to our news coverage or that any divisions in the newsroom are acceptable, I’ve worked hard to dispel that.”

Solomon notes that he has taken on the internal Times mantra that “news is war.”

“In a war you have to take a side,” he says. “And journalists have to cover both sides of a war.”

Speaking of war, Solomon has engaged in virtually none of the ideological sort since taking over perhaps the most conservative daily in America. No mass desertions of journalists who wanted to write slanted copy. No rearguard efforts to save the legacy of former Executive Editor Wesley Pruden. No campaign to name the newsroom after Reagan.

Says Solomon: “The only point I have made with the reporters and editors who write for the news pages is there must be a bright line between opinion and editorializing that rightfully belongs on the op-ed and commentary pages and the fair, balanced, accurate, and precise reporting that must appear in the news sections of the paper.”

In itself, that’s a big change. Under the previous regime, editors in both the news and editorial operations answered directly to Pruden. Even not-so-sophisticated readers could sniff out the resulting distortions in news coverage, especially in politics—backers of conservative causes generally got nice play, the Bush administration could always count on the Times as its official organ for positive Iraq news, and the Times’ crusade against civil liberty-impinging traffic cameras got barrels of ink.

Solomon will be lording over the news staff but not the opinion-makers, a point that pleases the paper’s reporters. “Change is good,” says Times columnist John McCaslin.

Building a firewall, of course, marks just one important measure in de-politicizing the Washington Times, which is owned by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon’s Unification Church. Solomon is taking several others, starting with a reticence about the old guard.

When asked for his take on the news coverage captained by Pruden and his deputy, Francis Coombs, Solomon replies, “I started on Jan. 28 and I only look forward….You can go through all news media and find stories that weren’t balanced,” he continues, offering up the recent pieces on presidential hopeful Sen. John McCain in the New York Times and the Washington Post. “Every day there are stories where we miss the mark.”

And if there’s one topic that Solomon is freakish about, it’s that his Washington Times not be perceived as politically motivated. When asked about a recent story that exposed inconsistencies in the campaign positions of Barack Obama, Solomon launches right in: “That was a fair, evenhanded story, and it highlighted issues that people hadn’t examined before.”

Tamping down bias in news coverage is a challenge that editors face in dailies across the country—from both ends of the political spectrum. It’ll require constant vigilance on the part of Solomon and his popular choice for managing editor, veteran Times editor David Jones.

On this front, Solomon caught a big break days before he started as executive editor. That’s when Robert Stacy McCain, a right-wing champ and former member of hate group/Southern heritage upholder League of the South, resigned from the Times to work on a book project. McCain was the longtime editor of the culture page, which features a series of clippings from other media outlets. Media outlets like the American Spectator, the American Conservative, the Weekly Standard,, et cetera.

The column had a certain missionary feel to it, communicating to Times readers just how honest a news broker they were getting. And if they needed further evidence that the paper had some bizarre agendas behind it, they needed only to check out McCain’s Internet rantings. His resignation letter included this bit:

“In 1997, my wife and I knelt together in our home in Georgia, and prayed that I would be hired by The Washington Times. Every time I’ve become dissatisfied with this job, my conscience has chastened me for my sinful ingratitude, knowing that I was complaining about an answered prayer.”

Another way for Solomon’s paper to bury its tendentious past is to simply toss out its stylebook. The Washington Times copy desk, after all, served for years as the wellspring of the Pruden era’s greatest conservative excesses. While other papers generally embraced plain English in fashioning their internal copy rules, the Times adopted another standard altogether.

Just take a look at the headlines and ledes from these December 2007 Times pieces:

Frederick seeks authority to deal with illegals; Maryland unlikely to heed county’s call for a constitutional convention measure.

By Tom LoBianco

Frederick County officials have taken an unusual step to draw attention to their efforts to deal with a growing problem with illegal aliens in their community: They have asked state lawmakers to pass a measure calling for a constitutional convention.

Gay ‘marriage’ legislation finds few ’07 victories; Supporters, opponents each dealt legal blows across U.S.

By Cheryl Wetzstein

The legal landscape for same-sex “marriage” changed very little in 2007, as both supporters and opponents were dealt setbacks.

The biggest loss for traditional-values supporters occurred in Massachusetts, the only state that legally allows same-sex couples to “marry.”….

For homosexual rights activists, a victory occurred in August when an Iowa court ruled there was a constitutional right to same-sex “marriage.” That case, brought by six homosexual couples, was appealed and is expected to go before the Iowa Supreme Court.

These copy-desk anomalies leap from the page. The Pruden Times customarily put quotes around gay marriage and refused to call gays gays; they had to be homosexuals. By the same logic, illegal immigrants couldn’t be called illegal immigrants; they had to be aliens. The odd placement of quotes and labels distinguished the Times as both conservative and creepy.

In April 2006, Pruden told the Washington City Paper why the Times did these things. On the gay “marriage” question, he said, “It’s not really marriage except in Massachusetts….It’s not recognized in 49 of the 50 states.” The point of the Times’ style sheet, said Pruden, was “all a matter of trying to be understood and trying to be as precise as possible.”

On Monday, the Solomon regime made clear its opinion on Pruden’s stylebook. A five-point Times memo stated that “gay” is “preferred over homosexual,” banned the gay-marriage quotes, and deported all references to “illegal aliens,” among other changes.

Reporters have been invited to offer their thoughts on official Times style, a significant break from the status quo before Solomon. “Even if you talk to Wes Pruden or Fran Coombs, in their opinion, what the Washington Times was under them was an editor’s paper and so the editor would decide in consultation with other editors [on style questions],” says longtime reporter Jerry Seper.

Prior to Solomon’s hiring, the Times commissioned extensive consulting reports that examined the paper’s branding and market position. One of the findings, according to a source who heard an abridgment of the reports, was a reader perception that the Times’ commentary bled into its news pages. Tom McDevitt, president of Washington Times LLC, says that the research showed the paper must provide “enterprise, investigative journalism of the highest quality, which means that it can’t be tilted.”

Solomon declines to comment on the reports’ specifics, but gushes over what they symbolize. “The consultants came in and did some hard thinking, some deep and rich thinking, and I get the benefit….I get to inherit all of this,” he says.

Our Readers Say


I don't see a "bizarre agenda" in someone praying to work at the Washington Times. For the Christian journalist aspiring to the Moon-owned paper, there is the problem of conflicting "messiahs." But you are clearly implying that prayer is a bizarre activity.

Besides that, if you think a fervent desire to work at the Times is weird, I ask: how many choices in the nation's capital does an aspiring conservative newspaper writer have?
Calderone's frame is silly, that the WP is centrist and objective, and the WT is ideological and rightwing. The truth is that the WP is liberal and the WT is conservative, both inject their politics into the news columns, and it has made for lively competitive interplay in the market.

Bottom line: Probably not much market space in DC for a tired little MSM copy of the WP. Who wants yet another iteration of the story choices, angles, and treatments already running in the Post, AP, and CBS?

If people at the WT are able to buy company stock, I don't think I would.
It's kind of ironic that an "news article" about cutting back on editorializing outside of the editorial pages was essentially an editorial, no?
It never ceases to amaze me how people act like the WT is anything other than Moon’s tool to manipulate our political system hard right and buy him influence not only here but more importantly around the world. He sees manipulating America as a necessary part of his plans. Kicking out a nest of racists isn’t going to change that anymore than hiring a new editor is.

They needed consultants to tell them their intentional right wing propaganda was bleeding over from the editorials to the news? That is hilarious. Come on people, do you think they just did not notice?

From a FAIR article about when the WT was supplying the deception to condition conservatives to distrust environmentalists:

“Lynxgate illustrates the power of the Times--a newspaper founded in 1982 as a vehicle to promote the right-wing views of Rev. Sun Myung Moon’s Unification Church--to promote a conservative agenda and feed it into the mainstream media environment.”

Look, any reading of what Moon has said about his media over the last 25 years reflects that the WT is a tool of his to drive our political system as right as he can get it while he also funded crusty old right wingers like Viguerie and Moon’s beloved theocrats like Lahaye and Falwell. Add to the mix that Moon also created fronts like the American Freedom Coalition to gather the Christian “right” for political power. (Moon believes that is part of his messiah chores to restore the Christians) Any comparison of where we were 25 years ago and today shows he has been wildly successful. “U.S News and World Report” while reporting in 1989 that virtually every conservative organization in DC had ties to Moon, quoted him as saying his goal was “the natural subjugation of the American government and population.”

Nice goal, eh?

Conservatives fell for his anti-communism bs - he has funded North Korea with billions. In fact he wants western style democracy replaced with his form of theocracy called Godism. That is where we all do God’s will. Sounds good until you realize all these organizations are designed to give him power among the religious and in moonieworld he is the arbiter of God’s will. Moon not only believes he is the Messiah but he is also God incarnate and speaks for God. He says in ways he is better than God. He teaches Jesus is not only a failure but that Christ now serves Moon’s dead son in the Spiritworld.

Editorial independence at the WT has been a McGuffin since day one. First, it has not always been true – besides a string of editors quitting the paper over independence, one former member personally witnessed Josette Shiner taking orders directly from Moon on what he wanted the paper to do.

But the argument misses the larger point. When your goal is to skew our political system right, you don’t have to tell a Pruden what to do. Bo Hi Pak wrote that he could “trust” De Borchgrave because he seemed to “tacitly” know what Moon and he wanted. Pruden, all Moon had to do was wind him up and let him go.

Moon created the paper to manipulate our nation right so it would fit with his other plans. He has bragged he has "influenced America through the Washington Times and so many different activities." He has, thanks to conservatism accepting him.

Don’t forget another thing. The best guess by a 20 year employee of the WT is that Moon spent 3 billion on his propaganda unit. Imagine that. Conservatives are conditioned to wet their pants over George Soros trying to “buy the democratic party” with what? $25 million in donations to various liberal groups in one election cycle? Moon spent billions. Billions.

I wish Moon’s cash for the WT was as simply as just a 3 billion dollar subsidy to the Republican Party but it is much more than that. Moon has had more to do with molding conservative thought in America than anyone. He has outspent anyone funding, propping up and molding today’s conservatism. Moon outspent Scaife.

Now, because of the credibility conservatives and people like Bush 41 gave Moon by shilling for him all over the world, he is now implementing his life long plot in the form another front group, the Universal Peace Federation. Yes, the man who says he is the messiah is involved in our nations’ negotiations in the Middle East and with North Korea. Again, Moon and his people brag about this but reporters in America couldn’t find it both hands. Shoot, in NK and the Middle East, Moon is Bush’s last hope for a legacy.

If none of this seems to trouble you, how about this? You know those billions Moon has spent frying our nation? It has not been any secret that Moon’s cash comes from overseas. He admitted before congress to bringing in “hundreds of millions” from overseas by 1984. The WP reported that 70% of his money comes from Japan. In Japan the Unification Church has been found responsible for swindling vast sums targeting widows with their scams. There are over 25,000 claims totaling over 800 million USD. One lady was awarded $2.4 million in 2006.

That’s the cash that helped fund ALL of Moon efforts including the WT.

To work for the paper, to buy the paper, to make excuses for the paper is to look the other way to things like what the first editor of the WT, James Whelan said:

"They (the Moonies) are subverting our political system. They're doing it through front organizations--most of them disguised--and through their funding of independent organizations--through the placement of volunteers in the inner sanctums of hard-pressed organizations. In every instance--in every instance--those who attend their conferences, those who accept their money or their volunteers, delude themselves that there is no loss of virtue because the Moonies have not proselytized. That misses the central, crucial point: the Moonies are a political movement in religious clothing. Moon seeks power, not the salvation of souls. To achieve that, he needs religious fanatics as his palace guard and shock troops. But more importantly, he needs secular conscripts--seduced by money, free trips, free services, seemingly endless bounty and booty--in order to give him respectability and, with it, that image of influence which translates as power."

Leave a Comment

Note: HTML tags are not allowed in comments.
Comments Shown. Turn Comments Off.