The unbearable acceptability of unsubstantiated attributions

Roger L. Simon is not amused: "Since Watergate, Woodward has been the Michael Jordan of investigative journalism -- the 'go to guy' for history in the making, the authoritative source of authoritative sources. Contradict him at your peril":

According to Colin Powell, administration officials were instructed to talk to Bob Woodward for the journalist's (is that the proper term for him?) new book Plan of Attack, concerning the run up to the war. I wouldn't doubt it. They were probably afraid not to . . .

Never mind I find his doorstoppers unreadable. I'm not the audience. And, yes, I can't stand to watch his smarmy pronouncements (there are plenty of others like him). What makes him outright dangerous is that his very popularity and importance have ratified the acceptability of unsubstantiated attributions. I was all for Deep Throat when he/she opened his/her mouth. But I didn't know I would be watching a porno that would never stop.

Comments

[Richard Donley]

When evaluating Woodward's fiction I always like to recall his claim to have sneaked into the hospital to gain some profound quotes from the comatose Bill Casey for one of his novels. But the biggest question in this latest matter is why the Bush administration encouraged their people to talk to him. In Colin Powell's case, of course, he uses Woodward (and not for the first time) to establish a sort of alibi to the effect of, "I always had doubts about the President's policies but followed orders like a good soldier."