The return of fly-on-the-wall journalism—and its demise?

As Walter Shapiro writes at Politics Daily, Michael Hastings’s article on Gen. McChrystal represented a throwback to the kind of in-the-room reporting that made possible such classics as Theodore H. White’s The Making of the President,1960. But because it resulted in the general’s ouster, the article may also mean that no public figure will ever again allow a reporter to hang out with him as McChrystal allowed Hastings to do. Ten minute interviews consisting of canned statements will thus remain the norm. - end of initial entry -

Jack S. writes:

You wrote “no public figure will ever again allow a reporter to hang out with him as McChrystal allowed Hastings to do.” It is a sign of hubris that McChrystal or any sane person would wish to speak to the media voluntarily. McChrystal real fault is allowing a reporter from Rolling Stone to be anywhere near him. To spend hours “hanging out” with him and allowing him access to his staff is a sign of impaired judgement that disqualifies him for his job.

The fact that he voted for Obama is just the final nail in the coffin. It is astounding that a hard-eyed career military man could be so politically naive as to not recognize the Kenyan as the alien enemy of our civilization that he obviously is.

I have often found military men to be politically naive. It may be the military mentality of obedience to authority precludes independent critical thinking. One who has been trained to say “yes sir” to superiors since childhood could not see the counterfeit competence at the heart of the Kenyan’s (former) appeal, somthing obvious to anyone who has an active mind.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at June 25, 2010 08:43 AM | Send