Sarah Palin mocks Washington Post for false report she’s joining Al Jazeera

The New York Daily News ^ | February 12, 2013 | Kristen A. Lee

[2ndDivisionVet]

Sarah Palin got to take another jab at the “lamestream media” on Tuesday after The Washington Post issued an embarrassing correction on a false report that the former Fox News commentator is joining Al Jazeera.

The Washington Post’s attention-grabbing mea culpa followed reporter Suzi Parker’s claim that Palin signed a deal to be a host and commentator for the Qatari-based network.

Parker had called the faux-scoop “a cautionary tale about what can happen with politics and celebrity meet.”

The story became a cautionary tale of another sort, however, when it emerged that the “news” came from The Daily Currant, a satirical website.

“The blogger cited a report on the Daily Currant Web site as the basis for that information without realizing that the piece was satirical,” The Washington Post said in its correction.

Sarah Palin – a longtime media critic who popularized the term “lamestream media” – didn’t wait long before smacking the newspaper for its mistake on Twitter: “Hey @washingtonpost, I'm having coffee with Elvis this week. He works at the Mocha Moose in Wasilla. #suziparkerscoops #idiotmedia”...

[humblegunner]

“The blogger cited a report on the Daily Currant Web site as the basis for that information

Blogger.

A blogger got it wrong.

I've been saying for years that bloggers are smacktards.

On the other hand, if al Jazeera had offered the right amount of money.. who knows?

[MeganC]

I bet Suzi Parker can see Al Jazeera from her front porch.

[Steely Tom]

See, this is why the big high-profile MSM outlets like the Washington Post are so much better than the internet.

They have all these real high-paid college grads who use their superior brains to vet the news.

People who just get their news directly from the internet can fall prey to all kinds of irresponsible bloggers, donchaknow.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Why not just come out and call her a whore? You just did, for all intents and purposes...

[Bratch]

WaPo’s Suzi Parker Demoted to “Blogger” After Publishing Satirical Palin Article as Fact – Update: Gov. Palin Weighs In

---

Today, former “journalist” (now “blogger”) Suzi Parker, posted another snark-filled article at The Washington Post trying to trash Governor Palin. The most obvious problem with the piece is that when WaPo first ran the “story,” it looked like this:

Parker’s source for that scoop?… The Daily Currant, which describes itself as the “global satirical newspaper of record.” As astounding as it is that someone who (until today anyway) calls herself a “journalist” didn’t catch this fact while gathering her research, it is even more outrageous (yet, completely typical) that it her editors missed it as well.

Currently the same article, complete with a bunk poll and some know-nothing academic speaking for Palin supporters everywhere, has the following new headline and bold correction:

Notice that WaPo’s correction states that Parker is now just a “blogger” while her actual bio at the bottom of the page reads:

Suzi Parker is an Arkansas-based political and cultural journalist and author of “Sex in the South: Unbuckling the Bible Belt.” Follow her on Twitter at @SuziParker

Way to ruin your career, Suzi. Bravo!

The new media, and even some in the old have been taking Parker to task over this today.

Chad Sinclair at the DailyDownload wrote:

One click. That’s all it would have taken for Suzi Parker, the author of this phony gem, to discover that the entire site is full of fake news.

Is this what the Washington Post has come to? Stooping so low that neither its reporters nor its editors can perform the most basic fact checking?

Parker and the Post made a second egregious mistake: They waited too long. The Currant story was published on February 4. The Post’s story? It published eight days later.

Now, if Sarah Palin was in fact joining Al Jazeera American, don’t you think more news outlets would have picked up on that? Perhaps MSNBC or her old chums at Fox News? Let’s be honest, it’s not as if the Post was sitting on the story for eight days to triple-check the facts.

The gross oversight in editing, the lazy reporting and the utter lack of common sense at the Post is astounding.

Dylan Byers wrote:

Parker calls this “a cautionary tale about what can happen when politics and celebrity meet.”

But Parker’s report is a cautionary tale about what can happen when writers cite satirical websites, such as The Daily Currant.

John Hayward wrote:

But the marquee element of Parker’s post – the entire reason she wrote the silly, contemptuous piece – was the revelation that Palin would become a contributor for the TV network al-Jazeera bought from al-Gore.  Supposedly Palin hoped to use her new perch at al-Jazeera to “reach millions of devoutly religious people.”

It’s a blockbuster revelation that turned out to be based entirely on a hoax… which Parker fell for hook, line, and sinker, apparently making no effort whatsoever to substantiate it, not even through the minimal practice of searching for a single corroborating source online.  Parker’s sole source was an obvious parody site, the Daily Currant.  She probably didn’t even bother to visit the site, instead building her story around a cut-and-paste of something she received via social media.  At the time of this writing, the top story on the Daily Currant is “Catholic Church Considering Jerry Sandusky as Next Pope.”

[...]

So it turns out that this is really a “cautionary tale about what can happen” when sloppy reporting, liberal prejudice, and Internet comedians meet.  It’s really not that hard to lead mainstream media reporters, pundits, and editors into phony stories – just give them something that fits the “narrative” they already believe in.  Just yesterday, on Sarah Palin’s birthday, Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post announced the Pope’s resignation on Twitter as follows: “Pope Benedict, following Sarah Palin’s lead, resigns.”  Maybe it’s time for the top brass at the Post to do some soul-searching about its unhealthy obsessions.  Or could this be more fairly characterized as a desperate search by their writers to “find ways to stay relevant?”

It does not speak well of the Post that they would leave the story in place without a full retraction and apology to Palin, or a complete explanation to readers of where the false material came from.

Doug Powers writes:

Michelle mentioned it this morning, but I thought I’d elaborate…

A WaPo “journalist” reported earlier — in a piece claiming Sarah Palin’s star has fallen and she’s now engaged in a desperate search for attention by thanking people for wishing her happy birthday or something — that Palin would be joining up with Al Jazeera (the Al Gore costume Sarah wore last Halloween was way too convincing).

Iowahawk posted the following over at Breitbart:

Something called “Suzi Parker” who writes something called “She The People” at something called “The Washington Post” bagged the scoop of the century earlier today, in a report originally entitled “Sarah Palin’s plan to reach ‘millions of devoutly religious people’ through al-Jazeera”

[...]

Maybe a more accurate correction would have added “because we are psychologically incapable of disbelieving about any story the voices in our head tell us about Sarah Palin.”

Another proud moment for the Washington Post’s layers and layers of fact-checkers. Take a bow, Suzi! And a 500mg of Xanax.

And Twitchy has covered it here and here.

Update: Heh! Governor Palin sent out the following two tweets in response:

Update II: And another:

---

[Alaska Wolf]

“Hey @washingtonpost, I'm having coffee with Elvis this week. He works at the Mocha Moose in Wasilla. #suziparkerscoops #idiotmedia”...

Sarah, keep smacking around those media morons.

[muawiyah]

Is there some question on the matter?

[humblegunner]

Why not just come out and call her a whore?

Why would I need to?

[2ndDivisionVet]

You might not know this, but Jim has met Governor Sarah Palin and likes her. I don’t believe he’d cotton to you two calling her a whore. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.

[muawiyah]

Who? We be talk’ ‘bout dem womens at THE WASHINGTON POST ~

[toddausauras]

“You might not know this, but Jim has met Governor Sarah Palin and likes her. I don’t believe he’d cotton to you two calling her a whore. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.”

Maybe humblebummer should explain to us all why he thinks she is one. Let’s hear his intelligent argument on the matter.

[toddausauras]

Is there some question on the matter?”

If you’re not calling her a “W’ then I apologize. If you are then let’s hear your rationale for doing so. Don’t just throw bombs like humblebummer, back it up.

[Chuckster]

Highly educated and well paid professionals who do not know the difference between current and currant.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Read post #2 and tell me that last is about Suzi.

[humblegunner]

I don’t recall calling her a whore.
Perhaps you would grace us all with showing where I did.

As far as I can see, the designation “whore” was applied by you.

And speaking of which.. how’s your mom doing these days, by the way?

[toddausauras]

You very clearly implied she is one...now explain intelligently why she is one.

[Utilizer]

I've been saying for years that bloggers are smacktards.

Yeah, well, I think the mental midget who used that as a source was even more of one. I mean, bloody hell! Next we'll be quoting from someone's facebook page or examiner-dot-com, for example.

[humblegunner]

Why not just come out and call her a whore?

I've stated that she'll accept speaking engagements for money.

Do you deny this? I never used the word "whore".

That was YOU that associated her name with the designation "whore".

Please, sir.. stop calling Sarah Palin a whore.

[The Cajun]

al Jazeera had offered the right amount of money.. who knows?

Damn humbledbungler, you made the same statement on two Palin threads, how repetitious of you.