A senior fellow at the Cato Institute resigned from the libertarian think tank on Dec. 15 after admitting that he had accepted payments from indicted Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff for writing op-ed articles favorable to the positions of some of Abramoff's clients. Doug Bandow, who writes a syndicated column for Copley News Service, told BusinessWeek Online that he had accepted money from Abramoff for writing between 12 and 24 articles over a period of years, beginning in the mid '90s.
While Bandow was forced to resign from the conservative Cato think tank for his misdeeds, Ferrara's boss actually defended the practice.
"If somebody pinned me down and said, 'Do you think this is wrong or unethical?' I'd say no," says Tom Giovanetti, president of the Institute for Policy Innovation.
Neither of the writers ever disclosed that they were receiving money for their favorable reviews.
Op-Eds for Sale
H/T TPM
4 comments:
being married to someone that used to have in her job description getting stories in the press, I was shocked at how accepted it was.
and depressed. I'm not sure anything gets written honestly anymore. anywhere.
Ahhh, common Tommy, I am sure your "killer Dear" story was honest.
Siggy, I am sure he will get the smack down. Too many people are flipping on him not too. I just amazes me to the extent his web reached (but not surprises me). And any politicians that go down with him (Dem or Repub), good riddance.
The article in BusinessWeek that started this whole thing, upon which all subsequent articles and Paul Krugman's commentary are based, omitted important statements and resulted in a complete misrepresentation. All subsequent who have written on this topic are guilty of passing on misrepresentation without bothering to fact-check. You can view IPI's and Ferrara's statements at www.ipi.org
Well, Bandow admitted that it was wrong. Ferrara claims the money was gratitude rather than bribery in his statement, and makes a nice distinction between taking money related to an op-ed piece and a regular column. The whole thing seems pretty shabby to me even after fact-checking (if taking Ferrara's word for everything is what you mean by "fact-checking"). So I don't feel too bad exaggerating for poetic effect, if it is, in fact, exaggeration:
Peter Ferrara sure Innovates Policy --
Innovates ethics completely away.
His journalist's pose is the "anti-Mike-Wallace"; he
Writes what you like if you offer to pay.
When someone's opinions come wrapped in a bank's note,
They'll want more than taking them "under advisement".
A journalist ought to just write a "no-thanks" note,
Or else start the column with "Paid Advertisement".
Peter Ferrara, the Times would've sued ya,
For staining their rep., if, in fact, they had had one.
Perhaps you could write for some rag in Fallujah;
Your briber would then be the Feds -- not a bad one!
Post a Comment