DMA
'On Feb. 19, the Wall Street Journal published a lengthy article by its stellar editorial page investigative reporter, Dorothy Rabinowitz...'
Ms. Rabinowitz's status as a "stellar investigative reporter" -- however Mr. Kelly gauges such things -- seems not much in evidence in her WSJ piece. At its core, the WSJ article is merely an interview, relaying Ms. Broadrick's assertions about Bill Clinton in her own words. But the article also relies heavily on the corroboration provided by Norma Rogers. Ms. Rogers, a nurse and friend of Ms. Broaddrick, is supposed to have witnessed the torn hosiery and swollen lip, and to have driven the traumatized victim home.
Had Ms. Rabinowitz bothered to investigate, however, she would have uncovered another, deeply personal connection between Norma Rogers and Bill Clinton. Ms. Rogers' father was murdered. The perpetrator was tried and convicted in Arkansas courts, and sentenced to life in prison. In 1980, as governor of Arkansas, Bill Clinton commuted the life sentence of the man convicted of murdering Ms. Rogers' father, releasing him from prison.
The possible animus of Ms. Broaddrick's primary witness may not be news to anyone on this thread, but if they do already know this, they learned it from some source other than Ms. Rabinowitz's reporting. As a matter of fact, they couldn't have learned it from Michael Kelly's Washington Post piece, either. As he parrots the same corroboration provided by Ms. Roger's, Mr. Kelly, too, presents her as an entirely disinterested witness. Mr. Kelly's rehash merely seconds omission with omission.
I realize that both articles appeared on the Op-Ed pages, and so serve a different function, and have different standards, than general news reporting. But, by the same token, Mr. Kelly shouldn't get away with characterizing Ms. Rabinowitz's WSJ piece -- however obliquely -- as investigative journalism. The Broaddrick story has circled for years, a rightist albatross in search of an accommodating perch. In this whole episode, Ms. Rabinowitz's primary skills seem to have been getting the interview and providing a high-profile outlet.
Ms. Rabinowitz, I know, wrote some important stories about the prosecutorial excesses and community tumult surrounding the Florida molestation cases. Perhaps this is what led Mr. Kelly to gush so in his introduction. Happily, we have a more sober assessment of Ms. Rabinowitz's reportorial talents -- from Ms. Rabinowitz herself -- printed last Saturday in the very paper for which Mr. Kelly opines:
"I am not a hard-news reporter," Rabinowitz said. "I really don't like banging on people's doors."
washingtonpost.com
ian |
