Did you know that being a cancer survivor can be a negative to your totality as a person and taint your credentials?
A new bar has been raised (or lowered).
Over the past few years we’ve had the pleasure of running links to the news-breaking independent stories of the National Journal‘s Murray Waas. Unlike reports we used to link to from the You Know Who Report that sometimes turned out off base and abruptly vanished — like opponents of Russian President’s Putin — never to be seen again (or retracted), Waas has produced solid journalism and is truly a role model for young 21st-century journalists.
Are we exaggerating? Hardly. One of the best experts (and bloggers) on the media, Professor Jay Rosen, someone who trains young journalists, wrote in April:
It should be obvious from the work who the Woodward of Now is. And if it isn’t obvious Greg Sargent can explain it to you over at the American Prospect.
The guy’s name is Murray Waas; he’s an independent journalist who recently went to work as a staff writer for the National Journal and the Atlantic Media Company, which owns the Atlantic Monthly, the Journal, and other titles. Waas has been in the game since he was 18, when he started working for the columnist Jack Anderson.
By Woodward Now I mean the reporter who is actually doing what Woodward has a reputation for doing: finding, tracking, breaking into reportable parts—and then publishing—the biggest story in town. He’s also putting those parts together for us.
Rosen is no (pardon the expression) dummy — and he is always required and reliable reading for anyone who wants to understand the media, the evolution of 21st-century news media, and the development (or lack of it) of blogging as an infonews source. And those who read Rosen regularly (like us) know he doesn’t compare a lot of people to Woodward.
So what has happened? We know other sites have tried to boil down the “gotcha!” attempt Waas was enduring in their posts. And what seems to be happening to Waas is perhaps partially because it’s a lot easier to go after people who report stories sometimes than to assign reporters to comprehensively tackle the same more-difficult-to-investigate subjects that a reporter such as Waas tackles.
But we urge all readers to READ THIS IN ITS ENTIRETY — Waas’ account of what has gone on in his life. It’s complicated but make sure you read ALL of it. There are a slew of issues raised his piece.
Read with care how, according to his account, he was blasted because he is a cancer survivor. We’ll give you a few excerpts from the final part of his piece here (BUT READ ALL OF IT):
First, it is my responsibility to speak out against any act of prejudice against someone who is a cancer survivor. One of the many obligations of having survived cancer is to make it easier for anyone who comes after me. There would be no excuse if I did anything otherwise.
The second is that [the papers’ writers] present me in the draft of their article as a person who was so broken by the experience of having cancer, bitter and angry from the experien ce. I exist in their mind and in their story as a projection of their prejudice….
….But conversely, there are those who have portrayed me as a hero for having been a cancer survivor and for some modest achievements in life. And even though they don’t know it, by putting me up on a pedestal, even though they have had good intentions, they have taken away from me a portion of my humanity as well.
As to the allegation that the experience of having almost died of cancer at an early age, and the aftermath of that, has made me a broken person, I think that I speak for many others when I say that while having had cancer was a nightmare, it also taught me much about compassion, resiliency, toughness, and tolerance that I would have never been able to contemplate otherwise.
Much of the good I have done for others in my lifetime has been because I am a cancer survivor.
As to the charge that I am somehow less of a person, or broken from the experience, I believe I speak for many others when I simply say this:
It is from the wellspring of our despair and the places that we are broken that we come to repair the world.
It’s important to read his entire piece. Then make your own decision. We have a few conclusions:
Yes, there will be many (particularly those who don’t like what Waas reported) who will say “well, he’s a public figure — so he’s fair game!”
But even a can of stewed tomatoes sitting on a shelf at Albertson’s Grocery Store on University Avenue in San Diego will read Waas’ piece and proclaim: “Why, the first thing that hits me is that there seemed to be a real determination to create a big story where there was no big story!”
Our prediction:
Waas is a cancer survivor and he’ll survive this. The spotlight on what’s happening to him will be a Seal of Approval to professional, skilled mainstream publication editors of publications with sizeable readership. They have perspective because they’ve seen every kind of story and easily know how to judge a “real” news story, an “investigative” story, and one that seems to be an attempt to create a now-it-can-be-told piece out of snippets.
They know when a publication is pursuing a story or doing a story that seems like they’re trying to (for whatever reason) “get” someone, either for reasons not immediately clear, or simply to put out a THIS JUST IN! piece to drive up readership. There is also increased sensitivity in news rooms to issues involving age discrimination, disability discrimination — and editors will most assuredly look at this story via their professional filters and reach a decision.
In the end, Waas’ standing will likely be enhanced because there will be a perception that a job is being done on him.
So, in the end, Waas’ reputation will survive.
But it’s unlikely you’ll be able to say exactly the same thing about those who have been and are going after him.
TO GET A MORE COMPLETE PICTURE OF THIS CONTROVERSY BE SURE TO READ IN FULL POSTS ON THESE SITES:
Wonkette
Crooks & Liars
The DCeiver (adult language)
Talk Left
Circumlocutor
Waas also wrote THIS POST in June called “A Reporter’s Bias” in which he mentions his cancer towards the end (but it is NOT a main theme through the entire piece)
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.