After Uproar Over Hillary Clinton/Bitch Joke, Post Pulls Plug On "Mouthpiece Theater"
Remember how last week, in an episode of the much-derided web series Mouthpiece Theater, Washington Post reporters Dana Milbank and Chris Cillizza joked that "Mad Bitch" beer would be an appropriate beverage for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton? Well, after TPMDC's initial report on the episode, the Post has killed the feature entirely.
"I don't think the series worked as they intended," said Post Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli. "It was meant to be funny and insightful and translate the superb journalism Chris and Dana do in print and online into a new format."
But...it wasn't. The Clinton joke, he said, was "a serious lapse. . . . It's really beneath us and not something we should engage in." After the Clinton firestorm, the Post pulled that episode off its website. Apparently, though, the controversy led to a wider discussion about the merits of the feature itself, and the Post decided enough was enough.
"We'd hoped the self-deprecating humor of me and the irreverent humor of Dana would combine to make something funny and interesting and on the news. It wound up not working," said Cillizza. "Ultimately it wasn't funny."
And, he says, he'll apologize for it. "[The joke] was inappropriate, over the line and highlighted the broader problems with the show. I'm personally apologizing on The Fix. It's not consistent with the Post brand, but more important to me, it's not consistent with the Fix brand I've worked to cultivate -- insider, straight-dope journalism that tries to shoot down the middle."
Milbank isn't done joking, though. "I regret that we put up that image," Milbank told Howard Kurtz, "and while I highly doubt the secretary of state has seen 'Mouthpiece Theater,' I would be honored to have the opportunity to apologize to her over a beer."
Late update: A classy post on the controversy from Chris Cillizza.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
Lying is easy. Comedy is hard.
August 5, 2009 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
you got that right!
August 5, 2009 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why do you feel the need to editorialize it as a "classy" post. Why not let us determine that?
August 5, 2009 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, you still can determine that.
August 5, 2009 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
True, I guess I just didn't find it all that classy.
August 5, 2009 3:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't find it all that classy, either, and this:
We are in an experimental age of journalism in which many of the old ways of doing business are rapidly being transformed.
suggests that Cilizza still doesn't get what's wrong with a so-called "journalist" trying to do stand-up comedy for his job.
Chris? Either it's entertainment or it's journalism, and if you think the business is changing so much that the two are inextricably linked, you're helping to kill journalism.
August 5, 2009 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm with you, Dorn76. All he did was apologize for not being funny. He never admitted to being hurtful or perpetuating lame-ass frat-boy stereotypes.
And editor Brauchli's comments about what "superb" journalists "Chris and Dana" are really smacks of heckuva-job-Dana-ism.
Seems all three of these guys need a visit from Jon Stewart so they can be reminded to Stop Hurting America.
August 5, 2009 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
True enough, pblues. I thought the line about translating Milbank/Cilizza "excellent" journalism into another medium was the genuine joke.
(And OT, I wish Jean Paul still looked that good...)
August 5, 2009 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
At least they had the foresight to fire Froomkin before they did something this dumb.
August 5, 2009 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
If anyone has been drinking Mad Bitch Beer, it's a direct descendant of the legendary Katherine Graham, by a long shot.
August 5, 2009 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I didn't see this stuff, so there's that.
But based on the print reports, it seems a bit out of touch to me to suppose as a "joke" that the Secretary of State, having been called up to drink "Mad Bitch" brand beer, would then reward one with the courtesy of accepting an "apology" over a beer.
Apology? It's a pretty peculiar thing to be having to apologize for, and I'm not sure an apology fixes it, and the over-a-beer aspect to me is just like, "Wot?" My reaction, is all.
August 5, 2009 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Milbank is having quite a run, isn't he? Kicked off of Keith Olbermann's "Countdown," and now his special webisode (or whatever the heck one would call it) is canned. And based on his apology, clearly unrepentant. Probably thought Bush was a barrel of laughs, too.
"Bit out of touch" is an understatement. This thing was put together from so far inside the bubble, they can't even see that they're in a bubble.
August 5, 2009 4:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree entirely. Apologize over a beer is something you do maybe with a fellow reporter, not with the sitting Secretary of State, the one you called, a, uh...
Well!
August 5, 2009 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Millbank desperately needs to spend a minimum of 18 months in the unemployment lines. Although I doubt if even that would cause the slightest deflation of what is a truly enormous ego.
Brauchli characterized Millbank as an "equal-opportunity offender." Given the drivel Millbank churns out, it makes sense that he would offend everyone, especially those with good taste and high standards.
Mouthpiece Theater won't be missed; and neither would Millbank were he to disappear entirely.
Whenever I think of Millbank, one word immediately comes to mind: insufferable.
August 5, 2009 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sorry, but Chris Cilizza isn't classy. White men sitting around making sexist jokes about powerful women isn't classy. Sure, in my private life, I've uttered the term a few times (though, after seeing Mouthpiece I question why I ever would say such a thing), but Post reporters are held to a higher standard.
They should be fired. Perhaps if they were fired, people would think twice before using the term to describe Secretary Clinton.
August 5, 2009 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
what does the color of their skin have to do with anything?
August 5, 2009 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
White guys tend to have the least amount of resistance on the basis of their race and/or gender.
While there have been some great strides in the corporate world and we even have a black president, for the most part, CEOs are white men. The White House Press Corps is littered with white men. The Sunday talk shows are run by white men. Professionals are often white men, though the legal and medical professions are starting to see some noticeable diversity. And, well, lots of white journalists think it's fine to racially profile, too.
And, here are two white guys putting down a woman on the basis of her gender. It's one thing to criticize a leader on the basis of her decisions. It's quite another to criticize her on the basis of her gender. Millbank and Cillizza should know better.
August 5, 2009 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
sorry, but i still don't see what their skin color has to do with anything. thank you for typing a lot of words, though.
August 6, 2009 6:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
The crack about Clinton (and Palin, and Pickering) wasn't the only problem. This stuff was just juvenile unfunny nonsense. And the fact that the Post has pulled it doesn't mitigate the colossal lapse in judgment that allowed the whole thing to take place in the first place.
August 5, 2009 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ding. Ding. Ding.
August 5, 2009 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was so awful that I thought they must be doing a parody.
August 5, 2009 10:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I apologize for this being off topic, but I saw this clip, and I have to get it out into the blogosphere.
Is this woman actually blaming Clinton for the death of Daniel Pearl, because he did not save Pearl like he did these two women?
See for yourself!!!
http://progressnotcongress.org/?p=2414
August 5, 2009 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really? Who cares?
August 5, 2009 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Awwww. so we don't have them to kick around anymore?
August 5, 2009 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cillizza's okay. He just needs to be a little more particular about the people he hangs out with.
Milbank, on the other hand, is a train wreck. In spite of his many appearances on Countdown, I always had the feeling that he was one of those reporters who was much too willing to trade objectivity for access and probably was making those kind of deals directly with people like Rove. Call it a hunch.
August 5, 2009 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I repeat myself on this, but Milbank, in particular, wants to be like a British parliamentary sketch writer, and thinks that the trick is to combine lazy reporting with lazy snark. The kind of talent that you see in a Matthew Parris or Simon Hoggart is just not that easy to emulate.
August 5, 2009 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
chimpale- your hunch played out recently when dana milbank had a hissy fit when Nico Pitney was selected and asked a substantive question of Obama during the early height of the Iranian election crisis.
His complaint was all about, as you put it, access. Pitney effectively stood his ground and helped Milbank portray himself in a most unflattering light in this exchange: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c7kr43HG4Q
August 5, 2009 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Makes me glad I stopped reading the comPost (and paying any attention to its adverts) when they fired Dan Froomkin.
I will say this, though: anyone who pays attention to Drudge and considers him a fountain of relevant information is a total fool. Screw Chris Cillizza and the forged journalism degree he rode in on.
August 5, 2009 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Milbank is skull and bones...
Better watch it WaPost or you may find a femur up your ying/yang.
August 5, 2009 10:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
maybe it was this YouTube parody that did them in. Hilarious.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJEPDwGVirQ&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Efacebook%2Ecom%2Fhome%2Ephp&feature=player_embedded
August 6, 2009 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink