Here's a good one--Obama's campaign is too disciplined. This is the sort of story in which the reporter ends up saying more about their profession, than about the alleged subject. Anne Kornblut claims that Dems are pissed that Obama's Chicago operation is tight, leak-free, and doesn't defer to Washington. Kornblut does not offer a single quote to back up this contention--not even an anonymous one. Instead we are treated to the following:
Some Democrats on Capitol Hill have complained that he is not inclusive enough. They gripe that he is running his own campaign in some states, rather than the traditional coordinated effort; that he is not focusing on working-class white voters as he had promised at the end of the primaries; and that he has taken sides in some House primaries.
Amazing. I'd love to know what you guys think, but what I'm getting is that reporters are pissed that Obama--or his surrogates--won't write their stories for them. These guys ought to be ashamed of themsleves. I have no pity for them.
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
"Some people say he is not focusing enough on white working class voters as he has promised" = Hillary deadenders who still can't get over the fact SHE LOST.
I think, Ta-Nehisi, that you're sort of jumping the gun on this one and focusing on the wrong idea here. Kornblut doesn't do much to characterize the lack of leaks and organization in the Obama campaign one way or another.
Sure, Kornblut doesn't attribute any quotes - direct or otherwise - to some of the Democratic leaders who are apparently quietly frustrated with the Obama camp. But I'll give her the benefit of the doubt since she does regularly talk with and interview those Capitol Hill types. If there's any truth to that assertion, Kornblut would be the one to know it. Everything doesn't have to be attributed if you're reporting with authority, you know?
More than anything, Kornblut is just giving a general overview of the Obama campaign - disciplined, organized, inclusive, egalitarian and forever pushing forward. Maybe Kornblut's lede distracted from the true focus of the story.
Shorter national press corps: "The black guy is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't...you all really didn't think we were going to make it easy for a brother, did you?"
If what you're saying is true, it might explain why McCain gets away with the crap he slews. As a talented media person, I'd like to know what your views of the media's coverage of Obama are. Because it seems that the discipline of the Obama campaign might be working against him.
I agree. It would have been easy enough to slip in a supporting quote followed by 'said a Congressional aide on condition of anonymity.' Even if she's got her stuff together, this makes it look like she's just forcing a prevailing view into existence. Ironically, if you watch the accompanying video, at around 1:30, she makes the point that after seeing the secrecy and closed-doorness of the Clinton campaign, the Obama campaign has gone out of its way to be more communicative. She seems to be contradicting her own point in the printed version.
This is all part of the subtext of "Who does he think he is?? I think that there are those in the media who assume that they are part of the 'king-making' process and actually believe that they made Obama who he is.
At least Republicans such as Mel Martinez (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/08/mccain-backing.html) and David Gergen (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/206827.php) are beginning to recognize and call out the (not so) subtle 'dog whistle'.
This is all part of the subtext of "Who does he think he is?? I think that there are those in the media who assume that they are part of the 'king-making' process and actually believe that they made Obama who he is.
At least Republicans such as Mel Martinez (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/08/mccain-backing.html) and David Gergen (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/206827.php) are beginning to recognize and call out the (not so) subtle 'dog whistle'.
Maybe Obama's campaign should just start serving the media donuts & coffee and the Senator should regale the reporters with cruel jokes. That would make the campaign more likeable.
Bob Herbert decided enough was enough:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/02/opinion/02herbert.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
I wonder if any other media members will start pointing out the obvious?
Also wonder when the McCain camp will borrow Bernie Epton's slogan from his 1983 Chicago mayoral campaign against Harold Washington: "Epton for mayor... Before it's too late"?
More from Glenn Greenwald about the media moving along the Rove message about Obama:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/07/31/mccain/index.html
I like your blog, and I respect the distinction between reporters in the field and those at their blogging desks. Truly, each see different parts of the world, one often illuminating the other. (I'm on the reporting side of that wall)
But you completely miss the point here. Not only was Anne K.'s piece not a diss, it intelligently laid out the cultural dissonance between a campaign born and bred in Chicago and the Washington folks. Nor was it a media story; except for one quote from Pfeiffer, no one mentions leaks.
As for this:
"Some Democrats on Capitol Hill have complained that he is not inclusive enough. They gripe that he is running his own campaign in some states, rather than the traditional coordinated effort; that he is not focusing on working-class white voters as he had promised at the end of the primaries; and that he has taken sides in some House primaries"
Well, Anne is deeply sourced on the Hill, and if this is what people are griping about, it might make sense to heed that. But overall, the piece was fairly complimentary, and thoroughly reported.
I had limited experience on the ground in an early battleground state, working on Obama's behalf, and the sentiment that "he is running his own campaign in some states, rather than the traditional coordinated effort" was one I was exposed to by local (pro-Obama) Democratic officials. This - it should be noted - was expressed ruefully, prior to what was a loss, as a prediction of how he would fall short of his potential.
The point however has less to do with deferring to Washington, as deferring to local party officials, whose opinions are known and likely repeated by national representatives.
In a close election, the ability to successfully coopt all potential resources is hugely important, and the extent to which the Obama campaign is positioned to do so (or not)is an interesting and highly relevant story that I would like read.