ON DISCLOSURE AND DOUBLE STANDARDS
I met journalist Mike Fumento 14 years ago in Los Angeles, when he worked at Investor’s Business Daily and I worked for the Los Angeles Daily News. We’ve been friends ever since. I’ve praised his work often, and we collaborated once on a monograph for the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Mike is an iconoclastic investigative writer and thinker who has been brave, way ahead of his time, and far more often right than he has been wrong.
The Business Week article about Mike’s ties to Monsanto Corp. and Mike’s response raised good questions about how long and under what conditions journalists tied to think tanks should disclose information about their sources of funding. (Speaking of which, for the record, I neither solicited nor received nor was ever offered money from any non-media corporation, government agency or individual for anything I wrote while a one-year Warren Brookes fellow in environmental journalism at CEI in 1995. I never solicited, received, or was offered such funds for my writing before or since.)
Unfortunately, some of the subsequent attacks on Mike have been sloppy and unnecessarily petty. For the record, Mike says the money in question was given to his employer (the Hudson Institute), did not affect his salary, and had nothing to do with his Scripps Howard column. Monsanto, for its part, told Business Week “the company did not pay for the recent Fumento op-ed or any others he has written.” This directly contradicts Tim Rutten’s false claim in the LA Times that Mike “accepted payments from Monsanto for writing opinion pieces favorable to its bio-tech business.”
As longtime readers know, I have been blunt and direct in my criticism of other conservative journalists who have failed to disclose direct third-party payments for their writing–whether from the government or from corporations. (See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.)
Mike’s case differs from the others in that he did not receive any direct payments from Monsanto. I still think Mike erred in failing to disclose the grant when his book was published, but there’s no defense for the ad hominem and inaccurate pile-ons on a journalist who has contributed, and continues to contribute, much to our improved health and betterment.
***
If the Fumento Standard is now the standard on newspaper op-ed pages, it will be interesting to watch the NY Times apply it–retroactively and across-the-board. Have its op-ed contributors who are attached to left-wing think tanks taken money directly or indirectly from unions and failed to disclose? How about open-borders pundits who have solicited, received, or been offered money from businesses who oppose immigration enforcement? Maybe the Times will assign a reporter to investigate.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Uncategorized

Weekly Standard
» Fred Thompson on Palin
Gateway Pundit
» Gov. Sarah Palin Responds to Critics... While Shopping! (Video)
Patterico
» Obama Campaign Reaction to Palin
Marginal Revolution
» The experience trap
Stop The ACLU
» What Does the Palin Pick Say About McCain’s Judgment?
Hotline On Call
» What's A Security Mom To Do?


NewsBusters.org
» CNN's Roberts: Palin Too Young and Inexperienced
MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
» McCain campaign confirms: SARAH PALIN!
Hot Air
» Heart-ache: Palin wants creationism taught in public schools? Update: Oh noes, Pat Buchanan!



See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
Trackback URL