Getty Images
I was reading Karl Rove's latest Wall Street Journal column this morning -- what do you know, Rove thinks Mitt Romney's in great shape -- and I was reminded of how very busy he must be.
The gist of Rove's column is largely predictable, in large part because it's so similar to what he's said in his previous Wall Street Journal columns: President Obama is bad, Mitt Romney is good, and there's ample reason to believe, with a little hard work from Republicans, the latter will defeat the former in November.
That said, when Rove isn't writing the same column over and over again, he has plenty of other tasks to keep him occupied. He's also on Fox News, for example, where he says on camera many of the things he says in his newspaper pieces, talking up the candidates he likes, tearing down the candidates he doesn't like.
But when he takes off his newspaper-columnist hat and takes off his television-analyst hat, Rove then puts on the hat of partisan fundraiser and political operative. I'm reminded of this recent item from Mike Burns and Marcus Feldman.
The Wall Street Journal is letting Karl Rove pen distortions that directly benefit his financial interest in defeating President Obama in November.
Rove, a Fox News contributor and former George W. Bush adviser, co-founded the GOP super PAC American Crossroads in 2010. Crossroads has devoted itself to defeating Obama and assisting Republicans in congressional races in 2012. As of April, Crossroads and its sister group, Crossroads GPS, had raised nearly $100 million for the election. The groups plan to raise at least $240 million ahead of Election Day.
Last week, a Bloomberg Businessweek article declared Rove "back" after leaving the White House five years ago, and reported that "[a]long with the billionaire Koch brothers, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and other conservative allies, the Crossroads-led offensive is collectively poised to spend more than $1 billion on the 2012 elections, according to Republican operatives."
Despite the fact that Rove is raising money to influence the presidential election and congressional races and has a financial stake in the outcome, The Wall Street Journal gives the Republican strategist space in its pages to comment on the election. Or more specifically, the Journal gives Rove an opportunity to publish distortions against Obama that directly benefit his financial interest.
I can't think of a comparable dynamic in modern journalistic history. When Wall Street Journal readers see Rove's column, they're presumably supposed to see him as a professional media analyst, offering insights on political events. When Fox News viewers watch Rove, they're also presumably supposed to see him a credible pundit.
But Rove is, simultaneously, trying to dictate the outcome of the races he's pontificating on. He's also trying to raise money for his attack operation, which is actively engaged in building up and tearing down the very candidates Rove is reflecting on when he has his media hats on.
Is it me or are there some ethical lines being blurred here?
Leave a Comment:
Is it me or are there some ethical lines being blurred here?
There are NO ethical lines for republicans, so nothing is being blurred. After all, boys will be boys and Karl has to make a living. I expect that he is getting about 1% off the top from all the 'purchasing power' and 'free $peech' being donated by the good willed billionaires.
There are no ethical lines at all in the USA today, there aren't even any criminal lines for the rich, as long as they don't harm their fellow elites. Do they teach ethics in journalism or business schools any more. It is fairly obvious to me that they stopped teaching ethics in law schools decades ago. To top it off, aside from the ethical failures of the elites, we have to deal with their incompetence as the screw up the simplest of tasks. I find it incredibly amazing how the rich reward each other for failure, how easily they discard those who helped them become rich, and how little their conscience bothers them for immorally enriching themselves while causing actual misery for millions.
Rachel, are you being fooled by WSJ like I once was? I thought they published technicaly knowledgeable financial stories, so I struggled with their news and especially thier editorials (there are no oomlauts in thier articles, no condors on their masthead, and they never use the word "achtung!") until I figured out what they were. I'm not as smart as you are, so it took me a longer time than it should you. Why are you even thinking about ethical lines? Would Goebbels think about ethial lines?
I never can think of Karl Rove and his many hats without my own unproven but inner certainty that Rove himself was the source of this now-classic and meme-worthy famous quotation from Ron Suskind's NYTimes Magazine piece that galvanized me when I first read it in 2004 (and led me to go on and read everything Suskind wrote from that point on, including getting to see him and fmr. General Rick Sanchez--the surprise guest!-- at a Culture Project event that Rachel moderated. A major treat!).
Everyone should memorize this quotation, have it etched upon the insides of their foreheads, whether Rove was the notorious source or not, because even if he didn't say it, it is clearly his M.O.:
Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush
BTW, a surprisingly wonderful book (esp. as an audio book on long road trip) is Suskind's The Way of the World. Surprising just because it is so diffuse, but thematically holds together with interwoven artfulness that just dazzled me.
OTOH, I did make a bit of a career out of studying hypertext theory and the relationship of the link to non-linear thinking...
No one should forget, BTW, the Rove is the guy who, early in his career in Texas, bugged his OWN OFFICE for the sole purpose of accusing his candidate's opponent of doing it.
It's just you, and maybe that Murdoch fellow.
Blurred hell. The correct word is obliterated.
And now a break to talk about 'American Exceptionalism'...
Currently, in the Olympics the best American TEAM is preparing to receive their GOLD medals. Congradulations to the U.S.A. Women's Soccer TEAM!
Rove's head is so big that it amazes me that he can get that dunce's hat on it; yet he always manages to!!
Big on the outside, small on the inside,
The WSJ is owned by Rupert Murdoch. No further explanation is necessary.
Do they have perp-walks in the U.K? Wouldn't want to miss that.
Murdock's been such a boon to the US since getting his citizenship, assisting in the corruption of our electoral system and augmenting the destruction of civil discourse. And yet it's hard-working Mexicans that get deported...
There is really no point to having the words "Rove" and "ethical" in the same piece. Has Rove ever shown any concern with being ethical in his entire career?
Rove and anyone who associates with him should be presumed unethical until proven otherwise.
Ethics? Murdoch? Hahahahaha! Rove?! Hahahahahaha! I can't stop laughing!
Coming up next, Thomas Monaghan explains why visiting mom and pop pizza parlors could give you hepatitis, Michael Bay offers proof that thoughtful indie movies "turn you gay," and Syndee from The Gap explains why the girls from Express are such stuck-up bit...did I say Syndee from The Gap? I meant to say 'S. Brandanowitz, independent analyst and author of the shopping and lifestyle blog "Imma Bout the Mall, Y'all."
Letting Rove pretend to be a journalist would be as bad as allowing a bunch of old men with a financial interest choose what they wanted in the Bible. Never mind.
I don't think any of Rove's hats bear the label "ethicist."
No Rachel, it's not just you. This is so sad. I just finished an American Government class, and I concluded that, while they didn't get EVERYTHING right, our country's founders did a pretty good job at establishing an ethical form of government -- free of "factions", or as we now call them Super PACs. Too many political players, Democrats and Republicans, are completely unaware of what ethical behavior is.
Like Rove has any ethics! Blurred? He's so far over any ethical lines they are obliterated.
wait......wasn't Keith Olbermann once suspended for contributing to political campaigns?
Question. Why is it that really bad people don't believe in hell?
Maybe they do. Not a stretch to imagine Rove post-death putting together a Super Pac to get Hell's incumbent removed.
Actually, he would desperately want to keep Hell's incumbent as they have been such great "friends" on earth! But beware, the devils is, after all, the devil! Damn it to Hell!
The WSJ has become a cesspool since Murdoch took over
Why isn't this guy serving his time in prison?
But Ham Rove must wear many hats! It's the only thing covering his bizarrely canned ham shaped head!
So that's why I look at Rove and keep thinking 'treyf'. Mystery solved.
I have never figured out why, if Karl Rove wants power and money, he has never run for office himself. I guess he considers himself unelectable, so he has to be the puppet master.
Release the Kraker!
Karl Rove is truly an evil man. Just looking at him gives me the creeps....
Rove and Norquist side by side! Terrorism
I expect Rove to have Rmney thrown under the bus at the convention, in favor of a team that has a chance to win. TRUMP PAWLENTY 2012
You cannot use the words "Karl Rove" and "ethical" in the same sentence. You could, however, use "Karl Rove" and "unethical." The man never met a scam or a ripoff he didn't love.
If the term machiavellian had not already been created, we would be using the term "rovian" today to describe Karl Rove's political tactics. I swear this man has sold his soul to the devil.
When I worked at a major U.S. newspaper during a recent presidential campaign, we were specifically told that we could not display bumper stickers on our cars, or even campaign signs at our homes supporting any candidates, lest someone question our objectivity. (And this was at a time when I was working as a copy editor on the features desk, not as a political reporter. But the rule applied to every employee at the newspaper.)
Obviously, columnists have greater freedom, since they're supposed to have opinions. But for the WSJ to publish Rove's column, when he has such a specific and significant personal and financial interest in the outcome, that goes way beyond the bounds of objectivity, fairness, ethics and decency. On top of that, I'm sure that Rove is also being paid for his columns. If he wants to spout his bile, he should have to buy an ad. Or else the WSJ should stop calling itself a "news" paper.