And this was something of a bipartisan affair. Clinton, while hardly pushing the anti-government agenda like Bush, played a major role in gutting financial regulation (and staffed the government with the usual party hacks and cronies, rebuffing Cassandras like James L. Bothwell and Brooksley Born and leaving derivatives to the Wild West (sans marshal), ending Glass-Steagall, and renominating Ayn Rand acolyte Alan Greenspan as Fed chairman.
If you’re in power and you think government can’t possibly work and you actively seek to undermine its efficacy, you can’t feign surprise at your self-fulfilling prophecy.
If you’re in the press, you shouldn’t ignore that while using misleading headlines to get traffic.
Hey, maybe it works:
Ad Pages, Revenue Swell at The Atlantic
But this is the 153-year-old Atlantic, not The Huffington Post.
(ADDING: For non-journalists, the TK in my headline is journo-speak for “to come.” In other words, it’s a placeholder until you figure out what to write in there.)
— Further Reading:
Audit Interview: James L. Bothwell. The author of a definitive ‘94 GAO derivatives report talks about industry pushback and financial-press complacency.
Angelides, The Audit, and Unfair Lending: An ex-regulator’s testimony to the commission needs examining.
Gensler, Derivatives, and the Causes of the Crisis: Several critical points for coverage of Wall Street and reform.
Letting Sleeping Watchdogs Lie: The business press rediscovers regulators.
Spitzer’s Ghost: The public record on lending hangs over the business press
Last fall the Atlantic had a cover story by Hanna Rosin titled "Did Christianity Cause the Crash?" Misleadingly sensationalistic headlines are bad enough. Writing the sensationalistic headline first, and then straining to write the story to back it up, is worse.
#1 Posted by Mollie, CJR on Wed 26 May 2010 at 12:51 PM
Mollie,
I'm so glad you bring that up. I saw that cover and thought it was reprehensible. I meant to write something about it but never got around to it over the holidays. I'll update my post above with that. I think it's a perfect point and illustrates that it's not just the blogs that are tempted to be sensational at The Atlantic.
#2 Posted by Ryan Chittum, CJR on Wed 26 May 2010 at 02:38 PM
Ryan - Another great piece. I'm so glad to see someone say that the anti-government rhetoric is a part of a well-funded campaign to delegitimize regulation and government. I think you are exactly right. I written about this (and related topics about corporate influence generally in politics over on the Conglomerate blog and in my academic work like this - http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1004&context=tamara_piety ). Usually people greet such observations as if they were an overstatement. Based on the story in the NY Times about the cases against the bond rating agencies, it seems like the tide is turning some on the anti-governmental thing. But just barely. And we can only wait and see if popular outrage won't be effectively re-channeled into the (for business anyway) relatively innocuous expressions like tea party activism rather than into effective regulation. I hope not
#3 Posted by Tamara Piety, CJR on Wed 26 May 2010 at 05:51 PM
Of course Porn didn't cause it but no one made much of a fuss in the news when Bush in his early years talked about breaking up the unions and hiring the managers he wanted in specific depts. who would then hire the "goodie 2-shoes" they wanted that knew nothing and so wouldn't ask any questions when what was done was immoral, unethical or just plain sloppy. Some in TV news and other places seem so horrified about the use of drugs, sexual favors etc yet many of these same people were caught in the act in TX during Bush's last two years. It most likely went on long before. Salazar should have cleaned house last summer in all the Interior and Energy dept. offices but obviously he didn't. Now he must eat crow for BP's mess. If the SEC was poorly managed then so were most others. Judicial was cleaned up in 2 months 2009. Obama has missed a number of chances to have things done right if he had required cleaned houses in all areas but he didn't. Now things look bad for him yet 90% of the problems came with Bush 2 or before with the Republican in the lead from 1994 on. Rove's desire to make everything REPUBLICAN for 40 years or more blew up just as it should have. Politics and government are not the same as business and the people following the rules and regulations for oversight can't be the same ones helping certain areas to improve. Conflict of interest and the latter is much more fun. You don't have to be the disciplinarian or "army sergeant" telling people what's wrong and how they must change and in a short time or they are out!!! Even most businesses are not as lenient as this government or those before Obama. Pornography in a headline is an eye catcher--but nothing more. Like you mentioned Wall St Journal shouldn't act like Huffington but look who's running the show!!! He wants readers but the quality of journalism isn't his problem--he thinks. People are buying it. Too bad.
#4 Posted by Patricia Wilson, CJR on Wed 26 May 2010 at 06:23 PM
At least , it gave you an excuse to run some sexy pictures.
#5 Posted by barney kirchhoff, CJR on Fri 28 May 2010 at 06:37 PM