Comments on: Why Did the Washington Post Sack Dan Froomkin?

By: The WaPo’s Omerta on Froomkin | No Bull. news service.

The WaPo’s Omerta on Froomkin | No Bull. news service. — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 03:20:37 +0000

[...] last week’s PR statement. Online Opinions Editor Marisa Katz, after talking Thursday with the Washington CityPaper, said she had been instructed not to respond to additional queries. And Editorial Page Editor Fred [...]

By: Emptywheel » The WaPo’s Omerta on Froomkin

Emptywheel » The WaPo’s Omerta on Froomkin — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:01:29 +0000

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 11:28:19 +0000

Great article! I liked Froomkin.

By: Froomkin to move to Huffington Post « Later On

Froomkin to move to Huffington Post « Later On — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 15:02:30 +0000

[...] Post spiked columns of his that contained pointed media critiques. In the wake of his firing, Post defenders misleadingly focused on (and then rebutted) the obvious strawman argument that Froomkin was fired for being [...]

By: DexterW

DexterW — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 02:07:00 +0000

Well, does the sainted Froomkin have another job yet?

By: New Daddy 06

New Daddy 06 — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:04:29 +0000

Seriously, they fired Froomkin AFTER they hired Kristol but BEFORE they hired Wolfowitz? And they claimed it was about money and web hits? You're joking me, right?

I can't say it enough times, in enough different forums - the management of the editorial side of the Post, moreso than any other factor, is going to be the cause of its financial demise. It's really a shame, because it WAS a great paper.

By: mongo slade

mongo slade — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 05:49:37 +0000

This "experiment" was doomed when the format was changed after the '08 elections. Click on " Continue reading this post »" for actual evidence. I like Froomkin, but he had to be complicit with this change, so I think he wanted out. Let's see where he ends up working....

By: Max Renn

Max Renn — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 01:35:02 +0000

Oh Jonah, it's so cute when you post as 'Yawn.' Now go back to blegging.

By: Yawn

Yawn — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:48:33 +0000

OK, even I can't take myself anymore. I'll admit it: I'm one of Karl Rove's secret gay lovers. He's MAKING me write this dreck. But I've seen a glimpse of the inner workings of the smug, self-hating, anti-human neocon machine and it scares me. Bad. They know they're losing traction, losing control of the American consciousness, and they're becoming increasingly desperate. Froomkin is just one tiny segment of an iceberg that most of us can't see. God, I hate myself and all I stand for, the talking points I spout without any connection to the truth. Even look at the name I use -- "YAWN" -- to signify how bored I am with myself. An empty life, and empty man, who has nothing better to do with my time than continually return to these comments, updating, challenging, fighting back. I have no life. I have no soul. I am nothing.

By: DexterW

DexterW — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 04:42:07 +0000

The overriding point is this: Froomkin sponges off the work of others, and the job of "providing a narrative" for the work he sponges, presumably for the benefit of the reading-challenged, can be done for a lot less than $100K. No wonder the guy is whining. His gravy train just left the tracks. I'm sure he'll enjoy being part of the HuffPo's legions of the unpaid.

By: Balloon Juice » Blog Archive » More on the firing of Froomkin

Balloon Juice » Blog Archive » More on the firing of Froomkin — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 03:48:34 +0000

[...] And here’s some more from Eric Wemple: [...]

By: Nightjar

Nightjar — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 01:45:24 +0000

feet :)

By: Nightjar

Nightjar — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 01:44:58 +0000

Froomkin will land on his feat at Kos, HuffPo or TPM, I predict.

By: Pete

Pete — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 13:05:08 +0000

This is the Web. People don't have time to read bloated posts like this. Put your point in the first paragraph. Your point was "The Froomkin axing is a red-letter event in Post history because it’s the first time that a major personnel decision has hinged so squarely on Web hits." Why not just say that in the beginning before getting into the background?

By: Bill Michtom

Bill Michtom — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 07:21:55 +0000

mortalkonlaw typed: "While torture’s clearly distinct from these, the fact that a criminal is put into a state of discomfort or physical pain is certainly no bar on the use of prison sentences, tazers [sic], or handguns." That the people who were tortured or, at the very least, "put into a state of discomfort or physical pain" were not accused or convicted of anything sort of dumps this comment out the window. Not to mention that tasers are killing people left and right; total isolation, used, at least, in supermax prison is torture; and what's the connection to handguns and prison sentences? mortalkonlaw typed on: "Froomkin did attack from the left." Froomkin attacked from facts, as you support with "his last column clearly indicates his willingness to stick it to Obama on his campaign promises." I sounds like you're criticizing the liberal bias of reality that Colbert noted. From reading the various commentaries on the firing and claims put forth by WaPo folks, it looks like his big crime was criticizing the WaPo reporters who weren't reality based. Probably also annoying Howie Kurtz, who long ago left real media criticism behind for the star turns on cable TV. Yawn, on the other hand, should stop yawning so that his eyes aren't squeezed shut and unable to see what's happening in front of his face: * Because Obama has been protecting Bush, et al, and there has been no investigation by the DOJ does not put the lie to "multiple felonies." * Froomkin has been criticizing Obama regularly, so the idea that he was only going after Bush because Froomkin is liberal doesn't hold water. * "Lefties ... did not want WaPo or Froomkin dissecting Obamanomics." If this were true, why did the "loony left" go after the WaPo for firing Froomkin? The problem with Yawn is that he follows the pattern of almost all neocons—Krauthammer, Will, Wolfowitz, Hiatt, etc.—he can't type without making stuff up. Nor can he form a coherent, fact-based sentence. Unfortunately, like the rest of the neocons, it doesn't even slow him down.