The Washington Post Salon Episode – A Public Relations Disaster If Ever There Was One – Indicates Just How Far Newspapers Are Trying To Bring In Revenue By Unorthodox Methods

Philip M. Stone July 8, 2009 Follow on Twitter

None of the big-shots at the Washington Post have fallen yet on their swords following the outing of proposed sponsored dinner parties at the publisher’s house mixing lobbyists, government officials and newspaper editorial brass and beat reporters in off-the-record get togethers. The newspaper offered two sponsorships for the first evening at $25,000 each with higher prices to come for other dinners.

Now, if you were going to pay $25,000 for such a sponsorship wouldn’t you expect some sort of return for your money, including how the Post might treat you in print,  or just having access to policy makers and editorial staff for a couple of hours would be well worth the money?

Once Politico outed what was going on the back-tracking at The Post was fast and furious and the blame ultimately was placed on some guy in charge of special events who allegedly let loose some marketing material before it had been fully approved by the publisher and by editorial. But whether the “i”s were dotted and the “t”s crossed, the idea was pretty plain to see and the fact it got as far as it did indicates editorial had given the general idea a wink and a nod.

Now we all know that newspapers are having a hard time these days, and things are being done that were never thought about in the past but for The Post to try on such sponsored dinner parties indicates, perhaps, that things are worse than we had thought. The Post has had dismal financial numbers for some time and so, by golly, the thinking must have gone if it can make up some of that lost advertising money by getting people to sponsor the right people having dinner at the publisher’s house, well, why not in these hard times?

The “why not” of course, is that the one thing The Post has going for it is its outstanding editorial reputation. By inviting for the first dinner people who may have been interested in influencing health care legislation and putting them together with Post editorial brass, and the writers who cover health, plus invited Obama officials – well, $25,000 would be a bargain for those people for such access to get their points of view across. And just what would be asked of the Post’s writers – would they ever write critical stories about the dinners’ sponsors?

Obviously those Post writers should never be put in such a position, their editors should have ensured they were not put in such a position and the whole idea – no matter how above board it was supposed to be – just has the appearance of impropriety and that’s the last thing The Washington Post’s editorial operation needs.

No wonder The Post’s own ombudsman called this a public relations disaster.

And it seems even the Obama Administration wasn’t too thrilled to read that some government people might accept such dinner invitations. White House Counsel Greg Craig sent out a memo reminding administration staffers that before they can attend events sponsored by non-government entities that they have to get White House approval.

And some of the online comments about all of this are scathing. Perhaps the best-aimed bulls-eye came from Jack Shafer of Slate, owned by the Washington Post.  “What really stinks about the now-aborted salon-for-dinners scheme is that Katharine Weymouth (the publisher) appears to have contemplated the sale of something that wasn’t hers to sell – the Post’s credibility,” he wrote. Doubtful that Weymouth will lose her job, after all she’s Katherine Graham’s granddaughter.

It was Katherine Graham, of course, who reigned supreme at the Washington Post during the Nixon Watergate years. Her soirees were A-list famous and Editor Benjamin Bradlee was often there, but there was no sponsorship going on here – she was one of Washington’s finest who loved to give parties for pleasure, not to make money.

Well, obviously some 30 years on and times have changed. And so The Post that will always go down in journalism history as the newspaper that broke a President (Nixon) with its Watergate revelations now has this stain on its shirt. Editor Marcus Brauchli told staff, “We should be in the business of shining bright lights on dark corners, not creating the dark corners.” 

How serious do Post readers consider the episode?  “I cannot tell you how this has shaken my trust in The Post,” Hemen H. Mehta of Falls Church wrote in an e-mail to The Post’s reader ombudsman. “No longer can I trust in its unbiased reporting when it is selling access to lawmakers. I have been a loyal purchaser of The Post for over 10 years, but after reading this, I will no longer.”

Post political reporter Dan Balz summed it up well. “This was not just two people in a room. There were a number of discussions about it….Everyone knows the dinners were a bad idea. If anyone didn’t know that before, they know it now.”

And as Andrew Alexander, The Post’s own ombudsman,  wrote, “For a storied newspaper that cherishes its reputation for ethical purity, this comes pretty close to a public relations disaster.”

Yes, indeed.