At The Corner, Daniel Foster writes:
This Matthew Continetti cover story — on Glenn Beck, Rick Santelli, and the Tea Party — from the latest Weekly Standard has recently been the locus of a bit of internecine warfare on the right.
One of Beck’s producers called it “intentionally misleading,” a “collection of lies,” and “a hit piece barely worthy of Media Matters.” He also provided a toll-free number readers could use to cancel their subscriptions to TWS (while bizarrely claiming that he didn’t support boycotts).Now, Beck and his associates have been known to avail themselves of the full emotive power of the English language to press home points that might have been made a bit less stridently. So I checked out the story to see if the producer was being fair.The answer is, not really.
As I’ve said elsewhere, the piece at issue was quite good. And the response to it from the Beck camp is a useful reminder of the pressure folks at magazines within the movement operate under.
You might think that mendaciously smearing a writer in good standing at The Weekly Standard would draw outraged denunciations from across the conservative movement, but the normal standards don’t apply when powerful entertainers are the offending party. So rather than a bunch of people publicly rallying to Mr. Continetti’s defense, and discussing his piece in a manner commensurate with what it deserves, lots of folks squarely behind him on the merits will hold their tongues.
Next time I pass a magazine stand I am going to grab one of those ubiquitous index cards and subscribe to The Weekly Standard. May the publication emerge from this particular story with more paying readers than before.