I think Jonathan Chait did a masterful takedown of Sam Youngman, but I couldn’t really enjoy it because, despite all the flaws in Youngman’s piece, I think he was mostly correct on his key point. I think merely being in Washington DC does something negative to reporters. Far and away, most of the political commentators that I enjoy do not live anywhere near the capital. And I find that those who must work that beat and develop sources and compete with each other for attention, tend to become almost relentlessly cynical, but cynical about the wrong things.
They get caught up in the game and focus on the score. That can be their own personal score: their place in the pecking order. But it is more often the polls, the outlook for the next election, who’s winning the news cycle, etc. Those are the facts they focus on when they try to educate the public. For the less partisan journalists, there is a tendency to take this a step further and actually lend credence to a lot of bullshit, either because they cynically see it as effective, or because they don’t want to anger their sources and lose access to them. You don’t educate people when you give up on the importance of the truth. It’s always tough to balance the need to nurture sources with the imperative to report the truth as you understand it, but a lot of Washington reporters do a very pitiful job of it.
It’s easy to mock much of Youngman’s piece, but its confessional nature argues against taking it too personally. I think the following is dead-on:
I suppose part of my disillusionment had to do with my breakup with bourbon, after a real-life, devastating romantic breakup that was followed by a downward spiral. When I returned from my 28 days in rehab, in January 2010, it was harder to ignore the near criminal disconnect between Washington and the rest of the country, especially in an industry that has turned neighbors against each other while its instigators clock out and meet for a beer together, skilled actors who in many cases spend the day feigning hatred for each other on camera but are actually bound by their shared nihilism and reckless self-absorption. In Washington, a divided America is good for business.
The saying there that indicates someone can be trusted as a source or Washington “friend” is that he or she gets the joke. Without a drink (or seven) at the end of the work day, the joke just wasn’t funny to me anymore.
Not every Washington reporter is fairly treated in that representation. Much of it would be more fairly placed at the feet of pundits and operatives. So, I understand why many Washington-based journalists have pushed back and blamed Youngman for his own decisions and refused to be painted with his brush. Yet, there is no question in my mind that there is a disconnect between what most Washington reporters are focused on and what really matters to most Americans. I think the problem is primarily with Congress, which has reached a point of dysfunction that encourages nihilistic coverage, and which is reflected in the historically low public-approval numbers they are receiving. A town without hope cultivates cynical reporting.
That’s why Youngman is correct that getting out of town for a while can be a real tonic. But it’s the capital, and someone has to stay and cover what goes on. That’s why Youngman is wrong to offer a blanket solution of self-exile. That might work on a personal level, but it won’t fix what’s wrong with Washington-based journalism.
