Arianna Huffington has been on the Russert takedown beat for months and months, taking her beef with the "Meet The Press" host to her blog every week as she criticizes him for his treatment of his PlameGate role, Katrina coverage, and general Republi-pandering. Her reviews have become a Sunday/Monday constant, and in nine months, they haven't really provoked any response.

Until now.

Huffington's latest column on "Meet The Press" lambasted Russert for hosting James Carville to promote, inter alia, his new XM radio show that he co-hosts with - wait for it - Russert's son, Luke. Aside from a few in-references, that relationship was not disclosed. Arianna also pooh-poohed Russert's qualifications to speak on ethics.

For some reason, this was the straw that broke the camel's back, and NBC got in on the action. According to Lloyd Grove, NBC responded by attacking Huffington's credibility, dredging up rumors of Huffington hiring a private investigator to spy on Russert's wife Maureen Orth in response to a hit piece she wrote on Huffington for Vanity Fair in 1994. Huffington has denied the charge.

A few things: this is weird for a few reasons. Why now? And why take the character assassination route with an unproven, untimely charge? It would seem that the best defense would beto attack the allegations Huffington levies, rather than imply that she is motivated by a decade-old grudge (since that piece she's gone from a Republican to a Democrat. You don't think she's let a grudge or two go?). It's a strange tactic on the part of NBC, and calls attention to something that might otherwise have stayed under the mainstream radar.

NBC News PR Department Gets Down and Dirty [HuffPo]
Big fuss over claims about Little Russ [NYDN]

Disclaimer: We have never met Tim Russert, but we have met Arianna Huffington and been welcomed into her lovely home. Feel free to take the above with a grain of salt accordingly, but in fairness that's more disclaimer than Russert or Carville gave on "Meet The Press" on Sunday.

I like to consider myself completely unbiased and neutral. I'm sure you do, too! But today I cast off the shackles of journalistic neutrality and openly challenge Will Leitch to a duel. Dude's hatin' on my homies! Consider the fightin' words on today's Deadspin: "Sports Illustrated called them the most hated team in all of sports. Why are the Toronto Maple Leafs so despised? It's not like they're carting off the Stanley Cup every other year (actually, not since 1967). Maybe it's simply because they're from Toronto, considered by many Canadians as kind of a Land of Oz -- if Oz were a cold, gray, bland, dirty, unfriendly place full of winos and jerks." Hmph. I mean, really! Leitch invites readers to "fill us in if we're off base with any of this" and we will by saying that not only is Toronto a magical land filled with sunshine, puppies, love, friendship, joy, very funny people, some very nice wine from Pelee Island, and KitKats that beat the pants off the cheap waxy versions you get here (no offense guys, but you've been cheated on the chocolate front for years), but it's also the hometown of some very popular people around these parts. Okay fine, yes, we all live here. Touché. But until you pack up and head on back to Mattoon, kindly keep your mean and hurtful comments to yourself.

P.S. I've got $10 on the Mattoon NHL team to go all the way this year! Oh, there is no Mattoon NHL team? Aw, too bad. That would have been payable in loonies.

Regular readers of James Wolcott's blog know that he is a big fan of Air America's "Morning Sedition" (R.I.P.) and not at all a fan of Pajamas Media, né "Pajamas Media" with an ill-fated switch to "Open-Source Media" in between. If you doubt how Wolcott feels, consider this pithy assesment: "To quote a line from David Mamet, these guys could fuck up a baked potato."

In keeping with this ethos, yesterday he rapped HuffPo's David Corn for his involvement in Pajamas and then moved on to longtime Nation contributing editor Marc Cooper. Cooper, noted Wolcott, went off on Pajama critics on his website, eschewing punctuation and dissing his colleagues at The Nation for good measure:

"Perhaps you would like me to catalogue the mirror wingnuttiness that I bump into day-to-day at my more respectable job with The Nation: writers who believe that there's a burgeoning national Russ Feingold for President movement; that Castro's Cuba is really more democratic than Schwarzenennger's California; that it's a pity the Soviet Union collapsed; that a new book critical of Mao must be written by the CIA; that it's just fine and dandy to have an anti-war movement managed by acolytes of Kim-Il Sung; that we mst provide material support to the armed resistance in Iraq so on and so on ad infinitum. I find that stuff to be equally crazy."

Wow. Hatin' on your peeps? Definitely fishworthy. So we followed the helpful link provided by Wolcott, but couldn't find the quote mentioned in the linked post or in any of the 40 comments. Fortunately, Google has a long memory -- if you know where to look. We threw "mirror wingnuttiness that I bump" into Google and wouldn't you know it, Google's cached links revealed a big ol' juicy post by Marc Cooper: the missing 41st comment.

Current Version:

Cached Version:

Upshot: Marc Cooper, have fun at the upcoming Nation Christmas party.

Pajama Bottoms (III) [James Wolcott]

Geraldo Rivera's career just got a nudge: a new half-hour version of his "Geraldo At Large" will replace "A Current Affair" on Fox-owned TV stations. Nice score for Geraldo! Earlier this year he was very frank about the fact that Fox News was a crowded place to work and that primo airtime was hard to come by; but instead of pulling a diva act (he is Geraldo, after all; damned if he hasn't put the time in) he's been a good sport and a real team player on the network. Looks like it's come home to roost. Congratulations, Geraldo!*

Meanwhile, arch-nemesis Alessandra Stanley and the NYT still have not apologized or retracted her assertion that Geraldo "nudged" a guardman out of the way in order to showboat during an on-air rescue in New Orleans. Lloyd Grove reports that the National Puerto Rican Commission has issued a statement declaring the "nudge" assertion and subsequent refusal of the NYT to correct it or apologize is "arrogant, injurious to Mr. Rivera, and insulting to the Puerto Rican and Latino community." Perhaps Stanley was distracted by the matter when she referred to top-rated Emmy-showered long-running sitcom "Everybody Loves Raymond" as "All About Raymond." Eek. That one's a pretty big gaffe.

Upshot: Geraldo's having a good week; Alessandra Stanley, not so much. Meanwhile, we're waiting for Oddjack to run the numbers on who will spur the NYT to a correction first: Stanely or Louise Story? Bated breath, people, bated breath.

Update: Holy guacamole, Gawker has THREE SEPARATE Stanley corrections from today. That is just insane. In other news, guacamole is delicious.

Geraldo At Large: Premiering In November; Will Continue Hosting On FNC For Now [TVNewser]
The Stanley Chronicles [ReferenceTone]
Everybody Loves Big Huge Glaring Mistakes In The NYT [NYT]

*Declaration of bias: as we've mentioned before, we went to summer camp with Geraldo's lovely wife Erica, who seriously could not be sweeter if she tried. Other Camp Winnebagoe alumnae: former advisor to the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq and sometime FNC talking head Dan Senor (Teen Unit Head, Head Counsellor, captain of the "Knights of the Round Table" team for the July All-Day Program in 1989); and theater trade publication "Show People" publisher Hailey Lustig (CIT Co-ordinator 1993; co-captain of the first "Green vs. Gray" August color war with yours truly - Green Hawks in '92. If you ever meet her, ask her to sing. Gorgeous voice, especially harmonizing with her sisters. There you go, some Winnebagoe factoids for you. It never rains at Winnebagoe when there's sunshine in your heart.

I feel like Kelly on 90210 - how does a girl choose between Dylan and Brandon? Scratch that: I'm Felicity, and nothing short of a wacky experience with time travel is going to make me choose between Ben and Noel. For those of you unfamiliar with this analogy, shame on you. Felicity was superb TV, and I think I just added another girl crush. But the bottom line is, I've got a dilemma: because for the first time, Dan and Anderson are making me choose.

It all started last week when Anderson lit into his fellow newsies over the Natalee Holloway story. Perhaps fed up over Greta's rocketing ratings, or perhaps really thinking he could lash out at his peers and not be utterly lambasted for it, Cooper criticized "our cable competitors" for the "hours and hours" they devote to the story, "even though, sadly, nothing new is happening." Cooper went on to show John Stewart-style, a sequence of fellow talking heads Rita Cosby, Dan Abrams, Bill O'Reilly, Greta Van Susteren, and Joe Scarborough on the story (which, er, viewers seem to really be interested in).

And then the floodgates opened. As Jeff Jarvis said, he "broke an unwritten rule of news: He criticized his competitors" and they came right back, including Fox sniping back and advising Anderson to worry about CNN rather than "on there instead of pontificating on what the number one cable news network is doing" (and, well, they do have a point). Then Dan Abrams weighed in - our gentle, mild Dan - and told Anderson where he could stick his "holier-than-thou attitude:

Doesn't Larry King work for CNN? I sure thought he did. And what about Nancy Grace? I guess not. Because if they did, I am certain he would have started his crusade by convincing CNN brass to stop them from regularly covering the story...But at least Anderson's show is only covering the most important of stories, right? I guess he is -- if you consider the disappearance of the newlywed on a cruise ship in Turkey, women who love killers and the Jackson jurors the most important stories of the day. Those are just a few of the stories he covered this week.

Zing! Oh Andy, he's gotcha there, and we confess that it breaks our hearts. We're sorry. We'll always love you, in that "I've never met you but I've seen you on TV" kind of way.

In the meantime, Dan - Anderson - random dude from FNC - can't we all get along? I'd really love to see a hug. FNC dude, you're excused.

(Thanks to TVNewser, btw)

You may recall our earlier post this week regarding NYT's Saturday item on Jim Romenesko's salary and blogger Mediacrity's displeasure at seeing that piece one week after its own Romenesko salary item (inspired by FishbowlDC's Romenesko item) had been posted - sans credit. Mediacrity immediately fired off a letter to the Times requesting a correction; the Times wrote back asking Mediacrity to provide a name and then "we will consider running a correction." Sounds like a reasonable request, especially on matters of sourcing, but Mediacrity thought that such correction ought not be contingent on providing any such info, seeing as, in Mediacrity's view, the rip-off was clear and egregious.

Things got huffy fast ("Yes, yours is an arrogant newspaper. But it is not often that the arrogance is quite so 'in your face'... The fact that my blog is anonymous is not a license to steal for the New York Times"). Fuming, Mediacrity copied NYT Ombudsman Barney Calame.

Today, the response: Calame writes that the NYT item had "specifically noted that the dollar amount had already been under discussion on Mediacrity" and said that the NYT's Romenesko salary information "had been independently obtained and confirmed." While props are lovely, it's clear that Mediacrity wants credit. Fair enough; after all, the item originated with Mediacrity, not the Times. After explaining why they need to have an actual person to hold accountable for Mediacrity assertions, Calame offers to "consider a Mediacrity correction request that supports the exclusivity claim and includes the name and phone number of a person who represents Mediacrity."

Sounds reasonble, but Mediacrity scoffs at Calame's reply, expressing disbelief that NYT writer Ken Belson "just happened to be browsing through the 150 million or so pages of public filings on Guidestar.com." It's fun when blogs get strident, although as many ex-boyfriends have pointed out, the more you rant the less seriously your legitimate complaints are taken. Mediacrity promises an update, so who knows what will happen? But one thing we can be sure about: we won't be reading about this on Romenesko.

Miracle on 43rd Street! Calame Clears Everything Up [Mediacrity]
The blogs leading the blogsMSM [FishbowlNY]

UPDATE: Mediacrity writes to Fishbowl, saying that the real issue here is standing up for anonymous blogs. The Times ought not have the right to plunder them wantonly, and if they're busted for it and a change is demanded, that change ought not be contingent on the violated blogger having to surrender his/her anonymity. Which is a point that I had not considered, I confess, and it's a good one. (Amazing how everything these days is coming back to anonymous sources). In any case, we agree, MSM poaching from blogs is unconscionable and, to paraphrase Willy Loman, attribution must be paid. A very balanced assessment of the matter may be found here; I found it by randomly browsing through 150 million or so pages of blogs. Just kidding, it's via Mediacrity here.

The Asian American Journalists Association have sent an angry letter to Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone "calling out Norman Mailer as a racist" but more importantly calling him out for dissing on "the accomplishments of all women and journalists of color" by calling Michiko Kakutani a "two-fer": the "token" "Asiatic, feminist" at the Times. To paraphrase: Yo, Norm, she's from fucking Connecticut, and you, America's Greatest Living Novelist, are a bigot. For shame.

Actual text of the letter after the jump.

continued...

One reader wasn't too happy with Kurt Andersen's "Welcome to the Sausage Factory" column in this week's New York mag:

Mr. Andersen,

As the owner of the largest and oldest sausage manufacturer in Manhattan, I would cordially like to invite you to my factory in the Hell's Kitchen neighborhood, to see that what we do is not reserved for the 'non-squeamish' at heart.

When you write "Journalism is like sausage, and if you're squeamish, it's better not to see it being made...." your implications are unwelcome (dare I say unwarranted and inaccurate too?). These assertions, with or without malice (as in this case, I'm sure) do nothing to distance my chosen livelihood from the darker side of past indiscretions from an unheralded era with unscrupulous individuals.

While I believe Sinclair's "The Jungle" helped both highlight and put an end to this type of meat/sausage factory (and America is a better and safer place for it), I do not see any value in a continued media assault on my industry, especially in this case where it is merely an attempt at a humorous anecdote to attract attention to your most recent article.

In short I would request that you consider the overall effect your statements may have on individuals such as myself and consider whether or not your point regarding the state of the media could have been made sparing the expense of firms like mine. It is a tough enough business environment without the thoughtless portrayal of non-factual implications such as yours adding to the pressure.

As a fine journalist and media-superstar, you know the value of education and accuracy. Therefore, I would welcome the opportunity to show you around a modern-era sausage factory, which may change your opinion of this industry sector, and might even, inspire you in unexpected ways. Plus a sampling of our sausage may be just what your July 4th BBQ is calling for.

Sincerely,

David Samuels
Proprietor
Esposito's Finest Quality Sausage Products
Made in NYC since 1933
[p] (212) 868-4142
[w] www.espositosausage.com

We're used to "no sense of irony," but "no sense of metaphor" is a new one.

Andersen responds:

It's interesting, given the recent findings out of the Center for Brain and Cognition at the University of California, San Diego. In a study of people in whom strokes had damaged just one tiny part of the brain -- the left angular gyrus -- the only intellectual ability destroyed was the ability to understand metaphor.

I'm just saying.

Although I'm sure Esposito's Finest Quality Sausage Products are very fine indeed, and a field trip to a Manhattan sausage factory sounds nifty.

Here's a bit that didn't make it into Whit Stillman's (writer/director, Last Days of Disco, Metropolitan, Barcelona) interview with Melissa Bank (Girl's Guide to Hunting and Fishing, The Wonder Spot) in the New York Post:

Whit Stillman: Have there been any bad reviews?

Melissa Bank: Sure. There was a bad review in the New York Times Book Review for the last book. It was terrible. [She names the culprit in a funny voice:] "Courtney Weaver." Another person who wrote something shitty about me is Francine Prose.

WS: Is that an assumed name?

MB: No. She's kind of a big literary deal. She writes a lot. It was an article in the New York Times magazine on women's culture and how horrible it is - I was in with Oprah and Helen Fielding. She called the book "a tricked up Harlequin romance" and talked about how unimaginative my use of language was. When I read her article I thought it was so bad. It just seemed like terrible writing to me.

WS: Was it after your book was already a big success?

MB: Yeah.

WS: Good.

Yikes! Further to our post below, Jonathan Alter has a response to Roger Ailes' response on HuffPo! (Peter Landesman is totally jealous.) Alter's response is a doozy, excerpted in part here:

But one reason your coverage may make fewer mistakes is that you do so little of the investigative reporting of business and government that is necessary for an informed citizenry. Fox's list of scoops on matters of public importance is extremely short. Perhaps when your network does less regurgitation and repackaging of news -- and more original investigative reporting -- you will be a little less hasty to cast stones.

Wow. Point Alter.

Two things: one, to reiterate the point made by our cousin FishbowlDC below, it's definitely interesting to see how HuffPo is evolving into an alterna-soapbox for journalists employed elsewhere. There's no way this illuminating exchange could have happened via the Newsweek website (and in truth there's no way it would have spread so fast). HuffPo is finding its legs, and that is cool to see.

Also, the use of the word "doozy" was, in fact, entirely coincidental - but those callback-coincidences are the kind of serendipitous moments that make blogging so freaking cool, and not at all moot.

Rx for What Ailes You [HuffPo]