Editor Of Washington Post Obama Muslim Rumor Piece Defends Article: "To Me, A Rumor Is Not True"
December 5, 2007 -- 4:08 PM EST // //

Yes, this is yet another post on the Washington Post piece front-paging the rumors that Obama is a Muslim without declaring them false. But this is a fun one.

As you may have already heard today, the actual editor of that piece has defended his handling of it in an interview with The Politico. The editor, Bill Hamilton, does acknowledge that he's now questioning the edit he did, but he also adds this astonishing explanation:

The paper’s intention, Hamilton said, was “to write a story about the kind of rumors that are out there,” and added that “saying something is a rumor is not saying it’s true.”

“We didn’t say it was a false rumor,” Hamilton added. “To me, a rumor is not true.”

Can this be real? Yes, saying something is a rumor is not "saying it's true." But it's not saying it's false, either. A rumor is something that might be true or might be false -- it's something that hasn't been verified. That's the crux of the issue here. Rumors should be scrutinized and determined to be true or false -- and then declared as such. I can't even believe we're still arguing about this, actually.

Indeed, if Hamilton believes this, perhaps they should put it in the style manual at the Post. Because other employees of the paper recognize that readers won't presume that rumors are automatically false and that a call needs to be made on a rumor's veracity. WaPo reporter Chris Cillizza, the other day:

Rumors are flying fast and furious that the Manchester Union Leader newspaper is planning to endorse the presidential candidacy of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in its Sunday edition...

If true -- and we should know sometime late tonight -- the endorsement would amount to a major coup for McCain...

Howard Kurtz, in a chat with readers a couple days ago:

I don't think the story made clear enough that these rumors are false.

There's lots more, but here's my favorite, from Robert Novak in a chat with readers last month:

Robert D. Novak: No, I would not report a rumor that could not be verified. But the Internet does.

Says it all.

At this point, a quick word in quasi-defense of Perry Bacon, the author of the piece. This is the sort of stuff that editors should prevent from happening. The Politico additionally reports that WaPo executive editor Len Downie read the piece and "liked the finished story enough for it get front page treatment." So presumably Downie signed off on it in its current form.

But either Downie or Hamilton could have headed this whole thing off by saying, "We're not quite there yet. We need to say a bit more clearly that this stuff isn't true. And heck -- let's throw in a bit of the evidence from the public record proving this." This is the sort of thing good editors will do to save a reporter -- and the paper -- from going over a cliff. Neither editor did this, and ultimately, this whole thing is on them.

Comments section temporarily disabled. To reach the homepage of this blog, click here.

---

---