CampusProgress.org | Hi, I'm Joe.: Trouble at the American Prospect?

Community Blogs

Post from Hi, I'm Joe.:

Trouble at the American Prospect?

By Superduperficial - Sep 24th, 2006 at 7:57 am EDT

Comments | Mail to a Friend

Bad? Brilliant?

You can rate this post.
Register or login now and
tell us what you think.

I was really psyched when I found out The American Prospect had signed up Brendan Nyhan, one of the leading lights of the narrow slice of the political blogosphere that's not nakedly partisan.

I thought maybe they were finally coming into their own, entering the pantheon of mature, worth-taking-seriously left-of-center publications along with The New Republic, The Atlantic Monthly, Rolling Stone, etc.

Whoops!

Oh, and apparently Harold Meyerson gave Matt Welch the same treatment a couple of years back.

Way to keep yourselves stuck in the amateur league, guys.

Reader Comments

I've got a meeting in 5 minutes

By jr Sep 24th 2006 at 12:10 pm EDT

so I'll be back to rip on Nyhan's whine in a little while. For the time being I'll just say, "wahhhh."

Huh.

By August J. Pollak Sep 24th 2006 at 5:09 pm EDT

So a anti-left writer for a left-leaning magazine alienates a significant portion of its readers because of an online tantrum he threw under the auspices of the magazine, resulting in his departure from said magazine, and hence the failing credibility of the American Prospect is "proven" in a continuation of the tantrum that made himself an embarassment in the blogosphere in the first place written by that same writer, courtesy of a blog edited by a woman who was notoriously assailed upon her hiring at Time for her almost complete lack of any political insight whatsoever. All in all, this means the American Prospect has nowhere near the credibility of The New Republic, which has seen the departure of multiple writers and editors in recent years for various major infractions of journalistic ethics.

Alllllllllllllllllllllllllrigh ty then. Sounds like an open and shut case to me.

Yeah, what he said.

By jr Sep 24th 2006 at 9:28 pm EDT

Just to add: The stated mission of TAP is to challenge the typical conservative BS that has come to dominate the public discourse. From their own preamble/"About Us" page:

Our mission, simply put, is to rise to the momentous occasion that confronts all Americans who seek a just society built on our greatest traditions. Contemporary conservatism stands to thwart those traditions; it advances its agenda by way of stealth, fear-mongering, and a massive propaganda apparatus. It is our mission to expose that agenda and the lies that support it.

Rising to our historical occasion also means reviving and rebuilding liberalism, renewing its connections both to American history and to people's lives in the 21st century, and giving progressive political leaders the weapons they need for battle. Through dogged reporting, cool analysis, witty commentary and passionate argument, the Prospect strives to beat back the right wing and to build a majority of true patriots who understand what really makes America great.

The Prospect's articles generate debate, further ideas, and set agendas. We explore and challenge the conservative views of policy and politics that have been so seductive in this era. Political leaders and journalists look to the Prospect to see what smart, resolute liberals have to say. The American Prospect does not back political candidates, nor does it attempt to achieve unanimity or even consistency among its writers. It seeks to provide a forum for working through the heated controversies and hard choices that vex its editors and writers as much as other Americans.

...

We founded the Prospect out of a conviction that the conservative undertow in American political life is profoundly influenced by the dominance of conservative media and think tanks. Our conservative counterparts have played a critical role in pulling the entire national debate to the right. We intend to take it back.

Now, what WATB (it seems fitting) wrote was neither insightful, nor smart, nor did it have anything to do with the renaissance of American liberalism. It was a weak attempt to score points for attacking Atrios, without regard to the fact that Atrios hadn't actually written what he was accused of writing. It was a dumb stunt that bit WATB in the ass, and his poor ego couldn't take it.

And his other column that caused a fuss? Equating Sean Penn's role in the public discourse with Bush, Rumsfeld and O'Reilly's. Real contribution to advancing the purpose of TAP, that one was.

Nyhan acted like a tool, got called on it, got huffy, did it again, and quit. WATB extraordinaire.

Re: Huh.

By Superduperficial Sep 25th 2006 at 8:28 am EDT

So a anti-left writer for a left-leaning magazine

Neither Nyhan nor Matt Welch is anti-left.

Also, Nyhan's post wasn't a "tantrum" - it was a thoughtful denunciation of a publication that's unwilling to do anything bolder than the safe partisan line.

Re: Huh.

By Superduperficial Sep 25th 2006 at 8:30 am EDT

Regarding Sean Penn - it's not an equivalency. If anything, it's more important if the Prospect runs something going after Sean Penn than something going after George W Bush; Bush's perfidies are well-known and well tread. Cleaning house within our own side is the essential work left to be done before the public will really trust us to govern.

Re: Huh.

By jr Sep 25th 2006 at 9:57 am EDT

Then start your own publication and get to purging--that's not the Prospect's stated purpose.

by the way...

By jr Sep 25th 2006 at 9:58 am EDT

...the problem isn't that he went after Penn and Atrios, it's that he either misattributed quotes (Atrios) or took them out of context (Penn) in order to score points with inquisition-happy liberals like, well, you.

Re: by the way...

By Superduperficial Sep 25th 2006 at 11:36 am EDT

I don't need my own publication. I already have TNR, the Economist, and the Atlantic Monthly. :) Life is good (or at least, has good reading material) when you belong to a well-served political demographic - which, I've got to admit, Third Way-ers really are.

As for Penn/Atrios, I dunno about the Penn situation since I don't know enough to say if he was misquoted - but with regard to Atrios, as soon as he realized he'd misquoted him he corrected himself, and made it clear the correction had occurred to his readers. Furthermore, his point didn't require Atrios to be the target to be compelling.

The fact that he misattributed and then fixed it isn't why he's gone. It's because he violated the mantra of "No enemies on the Left".

Re: by the way...

By jr Sep 25th 2006 at 2:13 pm EDT

Is that the mantra? I thought he left because he realized he was writing for an organization with a stated agenda to challenge the right and he'd rather be a left-wing disciplinarian than fulfill that role.

Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.