« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Hiatt: George Will's Critics Are "Trying To Shut Him Down"
Fred Hiatt has waded back into the debate over George Will's global warming distortions -- a debate that only makes Hiatt look more out of touch than ever.
During an online chat with readers that was supposed to be about President Obama's first 100 days, Hiatt, the editor of the Washington Post's editorial page, had the following exchange with a reader:
Boston: This doesn't relate to Obama but would you care to address the whole George Will global warming column controversy? Is there any concern that lax standards for accuracy hurts the prestige of The Post opinion page more generally?Fred Hiatt: Happy to, because we don't have lax standards for accuracy. He addressed the factual challenges to his column in detail in a later column. In general we do careful fact checking. What people have mostly objected to is not that his data are wrong but that he draws wrong inferences. I would think folks would be eager to engage in the debate, given how sure they are of their case, rather than trying to shut him down.
Let's start by handing this over to the Post's own Andrew Freeman, who wrote earlier this month:
[Avoiding narrow factual errors] does not constitute the end of Will's responsibility to readers. There is another important consideration, which is whether he provides readers with misleading climate science information that conflicts with what scientists know about the climate system. This is more nuanced than blatantly stating falsehoods, but it is perhaps just as important.
That's exactly right, and implicates not just Will, but his editor, too. The "wrong inferences" that Will drew -- to take one example, suggesting that cherry-picked data on global sea ice, a measurement that scientists don't even use to gauge global warming, indicate a lack of certainty about whether global warming is occurring -- go far far beyond the realm of honest debate. They are, pure and simple, deliberate attempts to mislead the Post's readers. So for Hiatt, Will's editor, it's not adequate to say, as Hiatt has before, that this is an appropriate subject for debate. By suggesting there's a debate to have, Hiatt leaves readers worse informed than before about a crucial subject.
It's almost impossible to believe that the editorial page editor of a major paper would need to have this spelled out.
Josh
Zachary
"It's almost impossible to believe that the editorial page editor of a major paper would need to have this spelled out."
No it's not impossible. Look at how loony right the Post editorial page has become.
April 29, 2009 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
It would be a leap to expect anyone to call out George Will because he has that mean streak in him and it is my guess no one wants his snide cracks directed their way. However, all thinking people know he is never going to be even-handed so let him prattle on with his slanted rhetoric. Who even cares what he says?
April 30, 2009 1:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well said - It really would be a leap to expect anyone to call out Chris Mathews or Rachel Maddow or Keith Obermann because they has that mean streak in them and it is my guess no one wants their snide cracks directed their way. However, all thinking people know they are never going to be even-handed so let them prattle on with their slanted rhetoric, and get "tingles" down their legs. Who even cares what they say? Throw in Al Frankin and you've got the makings of a good game of "fish".
May 1, 2009 3:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sadly, there is nothing whatsoever surprising about Hiatt's position.
April 29, 2009 5:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Absolutely nothing at all. Somewhere along the line, editors and columnists and journalists 'bought' that splitting the difference between two opposing sides always arrives at the 'truth.'
Kind of like averaging the income of Bill Gates and 20 homeless people is an accurate way of determining the average income of each person.
May 2, 2009 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fred, I hear there's a party at Phil Bronstein's house...
April 29, 2009 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, following Hiatt's login, then, if one of the Post's political writers uses "science" writings from pre-Columbus and claims that the earth is flat in an opinion piece using that as "data", then that would also be acceptable.
It is embarassing. The Post is blatantly pushing the GW-denier ideology here.
April 29, 2009 5:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, the Post just ran Bill Kristol citing a column he wrote in 2001 as proof he, Kristol, was right at least once this decade in his own opinion.
April 29, 2009 6:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
George Will is a deliberate, calculating liar and Fred Hiatt knows that perfectly well. And Hiatt's suggestion that it is appropriate for the Post to provide a platform for a partisan Republican propagandist, who is in reality little more than a mediocre sports writer, to "challenge the scientific consenus" on anthropogenic global warming with his deliberate lies, is pathetic.
Hiatt has clearly decided that it is in the Post's financial interest to join the Wall Street Journal op-ed pages as an aggressive purveyor of the campaign of deceit and denial funded by the fossil fuel corporations.
Had Hiatt been in charge of the Post editorial pages in the past, they would no doubt have featured columnists "challenging the consensus" that smoking tobacco causes cancer. Or any other "consensus" that some corporation would pay them to challenge.
George Will lies, for money. Fred Hiatt lies, for money. It's really as simple as that.
April 29, 2009 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Aren't you supposed to "shut down" liars? It seems to my democracies don't work when journalists are running around lying. So, yes, we would like to shut him down. Welcome to the world.
April 29, 2009 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why do the newspapers think they are going out of business? Do they ever consider that their product might be part of the problem?
Why does the New York Times think I am going to buy a 'newspaper' that refers to torture as 'harsh interrogation methods'?
Why does the Washington Post think I am going to buy a paper that knowingly prints George Will's lies and fabrications?
April 29, 2009 6:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right on.
Send your money to Amy Goodman.
April 29, 2009 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am far more concerned about Will's assault on denim than the Post editor's defense of this science denier.
April 29, 2009 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
You don't get rich shilling for the poor.
George Will is the kind of person who can think but can't feel.
Ultimately, it does not matter to him what WE think of him because he knows he is secure and well payed.
Note he doesn't play baseball - his passion - he strangely adores it from afar.
So of the three areas we function as humans - feeling, thinking, and doing....he's firing on only one cylinder.
I pity him.
April 29, 2009 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that , like George Will, his data were (sic) old and out of sorts. Mostly about wearing dungarees.
Fucking tools.
April 29, 2009 6:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
George Will's first column should have been his "Last Word."
April 29, 2009 6:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is an element of truth to what Hiatt says. If George Will were not able to make up his own facts, he would have very little to say. So yeah, he would be shut down.
April 29, 2009 7:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Though I rarely agree with G.Will , I do appreciate has grasp of history and his wicked tongue...He incites the other pundits to really come to the table and not act like boobleheads!
There are few people in the repub camp who have the leveled criptic gall of Will...We must have balance in reporting because otherwise the Dem's will fall prey to the same malaise that the repubs did...the fringe will take over and we will loose!!!
April 30, 2009 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
fine, let's have some balance. i'd love to see some balance to democratic centrists coming from the left. where are all those oped pieces in favor of single payer health care and jail terms for torturers?
April 30, 2009 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly.
We've been treated to a sequence of op-ed pieces defending the torture position, ranging all the way from "it wasn't torture" to "torture is necessary" to "we should just move on". I'm still waiting for the "let's enforce the law" op-ed piece.
Hiatt has no ground to stand on when he whines about people trying to silence debate of any sort. Under his leadership, the editorial page of the Post has consistently shut out liberal voices while loading on the Bushite apologists. This has been going on for several years.
May 1, 2009 3:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fred wants a debate? Great idea. Let WaPo sponsor a public debate, with formal rules for the interaction, between George Will and any climate change expert who's a good public speaker. I'm not alone in being willing to pay $20 and up for a 90-minute evisceration.
Come to think of it, this could be a weekly event, with Will on almost any topic. Is WaPo looking for a solid business plan? Nothing says "steady revenue" like a pro wrestling approach to their bottomless barrel of hapless pundits, re-cast as ignorant villains for public amusement.
April 30, 2009 11:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
George Will is a pompous ass.
Case closed.
April 30, 2009 12:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
The people in this thread are a greater threat to the public good than George Will could ever be -- liberal fascists who divide the world into two groups:
-- Voices that agree with them
-- Voices that must be censored and silenced
I'll take George Will anytime.
April 30, 2009 4:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sandownaz,
Nope, your primitive GOP inclined view of 'you are with us or against us' is your perception of all your own doing. You can only see in black and white and you obviously don't have enough education or raw intellect to understand either climate science or some of the metaphors used above about George Will's position in his op-ed article.
Will, either intentionally or due to his own shortcomings of his knowledge of climate science, chose to use dubious metrics to question the occurence of climate change that scientists know to be unreliable. This makes his statements not a mere opinion piece, but an distortion of facts and his position untenble. He's not representing 'honest' debate on the issue, by any stretch which is why there was a massive public outcry. Instead, his piece reeks of the kind of distortions that republicans have been using the last 8 years to push their agendas. This is a big difference compared to any classic conservative vs liberal positions where the 'facts' aren't in dispute and positions of public policy come down to individual opinions.
There's a big difference. If you can't understand why this difference is important to why those here feel Will should be 'silenced' then it's sad to say it looks like it's simply beyond your grasp.
May 1, 2009 1:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
..and if Sandownaz doesn't like the commenters here, he shouldn't read them.
May 1, 2009 1:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Taking George Will at his word anytime, no matter if he is right or wrong is so ummmm, Republican. The guy is absolutely not capable of having a fair discussion on these issues that are so important to our country's survival. But not to worry, this very approach by the WP editor is why so many people have now discontinued their subscription to the WP. So perhaps in the end, financial considerations will force the WP into doing what is right. Perhaps, but I am NOT holding my breath.
May 3, 2009 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Take away the bow tie, vocabulary, lies, arrogance and the platforms (WaPo, ABC) and George Will would be asking if you'd like fries with that order.
He is a complete knowingly wilful fraud. If you worship lies and money then he's as good a god as any for you.
May 4, 2009 10:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I always wondered why the WaPo started getting shitty the last few years......Hiatt.
May 1, 2009 1:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
While Will may be the highest profile wingnut on the op-ed page, he would not make my top three from WaPo for dismissal as too extreme. Hiatt would take it on the neck before that jackass.
May 4, 2009 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even as a liar, George Will is disingenuous. Apparently, his editor is trying to keep pace with him. And these people get paid well to put out this trash. Unbelievable.
May 4, 2009 10:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anyone that believes that human activity is warming the globe is simply nuts. George Will should give an inch to this fools. Someone has to stand up to preachers of junk science.
May 5, 2009 8:17 PM | Reply | Permalink