The Phoenix

Johnson vs. Romney, reconsidered

Remember AP reporter Glen Johnson's showdown with Mitt Romney?

At the time, I assumed that Johnson went off on Romney because he was 1) tired and/or in a bad mood and 2) fed up with Romney's shtick. But after reading this fascinating Politico piece on the AP's ongoing re-invention, and the role Washington Bureau chief Ron Fournier is playing therein, I'm not so sure.

With Fournier leading the charge, writes Michael Calderone (via Romenesko), the AP is

scrapping the stonefaced approach to journalism that accepts politicians’ statements at face value and offers equal treatment to all sides of an argument. Instead, reporters are encouraged to throw away the weasel words and call it like they see it when they think public officials have revealed themselves as phonies or flip-floppers. [emph. added]

Whether you loved or hated what Johnson did, he was certainly calling it like he saw it. This could explain why Johnson acted as he did, and why neither he nor the AP ever publicly apologized to Mitt.

Published Jul 14 2008, 02:22 PM by Adam Reilly

Tony Schinella said:

Frankly, AP could stand to get a bit more gritty.

July 14, 2008 9:07 PM
aging cynic said:

I don't know, they were plenty "gritty" with Tony Snow, (post mortem). Nice.

July 14, 2008 10:12 PM
Anti-Politician said:

Then way hasn't the AP (or an AP reporter) gone off on any other candidate? That attack by Mr. Johnson was clearly based on some personal animosity for Romney . . . and it lacked any amount of professionalism. Are McCain, Obama or Hillary (or any of the other candidates) free of inconsistencies or moments of phoniness? Yet they have been spared the wrath of reporters like Glen Johnson.

July 15, 2008 10:40 AM
Tony Schinella said:

Glen Johnson is a long-time Boston reporter covering Romney over the years. I can't say whether there is "animosity" or not. I will say that Hillary rarely had the kind of give and take the Romney did during this instance. She was very protective and controlled by her handlers.

McCain has had them and gotten into shouting matches with reporters and people at his events. He tries to remain composed but sometimes doesn't.

That said, while Johnson may have come across as disrespectful, Romney told a whopper that day and was called on it.

As far as Tony Snow goes, I don't know what 'aging' is referring to.

July 15, 2008 12:45 PM
aging cynic said:

www.nytimes.com/.../AP-Obit-Snow.html

"WASHINGTON (AP) With a quick-from-the-lip repartee, broadcaster's good looks and a relentlessly bright outlook -- if not always a command of the facts -- he became a popular figure around the country to the delight of his White House bosses."

Being accused by the AP of being casual with the facts is truly amazing, particularly within a day of the subject's death. Pretty much what I would expect from them. Stay classy, AP!

July 15, 2008 10:00 PM
Tony Schinella said:

You know "aging cynic," I find it funny that when AP wants to get a tad gritty, in order to save themselves, it's a problem. But when FoxNews, the National Review, Limbaugh, or whoever in the media with a right-of-center slant get gritty, there is nothing wrong with it. It's important to remember that AP offers a ton of material to news directors everywhere. Those directors - not AP itself - choose what gets published.

July 17, 2008 11:34 AM
Ex-newshound said:

Interesting piece. It reminded of an AP story that caught my eye in January on the night of the Michigan primary:

"Mitt Romney's victory in Michigan was a defeat for authenticity in politics.

"The former Massachusetts governor pandered to voters, distorted his opponents' record and continued to show why he's the most malleable -- and least credible -- major presidential candidate.

"And it worked."

The byline? Ron Fournier.

July 17, 2008 8:15 PM
aging cynic said:

Tony, against my better judgment:

1.So if we do something "to save (our)selves", that makes it OK? Isn't that situation ethics?

2.It's not about "grit". (Or delusions of monolithic blue and red.)If a right-winger chose a man's death to make cheap points, it would be just as execrable. (And I'm sure when it happens, you'll let us know).

3.Yeah, you're right. It wasn't AP, just that down-the-middle NY Times.

July 19, 2008 4:27 PM