Explaining Myself

On the possible eve of possible indictments, I thought I should take the opportunity to clear up a few things.

My mailbag has been overflowing since I posted my account of the actions that brought me face-to-face with federal prosecutors, and before that, face-to-jowls with Karl Rove and "Scooter" Libby. Many correspondents wrote that my post left far too many unanswered questions, and in fact, prompted a whole slew of new ones. Questions of "why" - "Why did you go to jail rather than reveal your sources, who after all, weren't really your sources?" And questions of "how" - "How can we trust you when you're clearly a total sleaze?" And from our very young readers, questions of "what" - as in "What did you mean when you said that Libby was Rove's 'wingman'?" Ahh, the innocence.

Others offered a broader criticism: that my story reveals how close the nexus between government and media has become in recent years. In the words of one correspondent, if "you and your ilk weren't exactly in bed with the Bush team, you were certainly leaning against the nightstand in a sheer teddy while [Administration officials] gestured for a reach around." Well put.

But perhaps the most poignant response came from a young man who is newly employed in the Washington, DC area:

Dear Mr. Fan,

I am relatively new to the blogosphere but I read your article with mounting interest - interest that quickly became revulsion as the sheer scale of human degradation in our nation's capitol swept over me like a mud bath. Your portrait of so-called "journalists" and high-powered operatives hobnobbing and carousing while our brave men and women fight and die overseas is deeply disturbing. Over all, I found the scenario described so retch-inducing that I actually began to question why I ever got involved with public service in the first place.

Barack Obama

I'm sorry you feel that way, Senator, but glad that you read the blog.

But to the rest of my critics, I can only say this: Don't you people believe in the First Amendment? Or for that matter, democracy?

An important principle is at stake: if reporters are no longer allowed to schmooze with their subjects, how can journalists ever get close enough to perform the time-honored "watchdog" role in case they ever decide to grow some balls? Further, having the trust of your sources is critically important. What's a good way to gain an influential person's trust? Become their willing tool. Of course, people will say this compromises your objectivity. I say there's no better way to prove you lack your own agenda than to advance someone else's.

Being known as the go-to guy or gal when a high-powered individual wants a certain story in the press, be it "Iraq has WMD" or "Tom Cruise has fertile sperm" increases a reporter's stature and enhances his or her ability to make connections. Conversely, there's a word for press people that fail to make the right connections, and that word is poor. And let's get real here: poor journalists without powerful friends don't break the big stories - factual or not.

Oh sure, it's very nice for men like George Clooney to glamourize an era when media workhorses exposed the truth while smoking themselves to death on camera. But those days are gone and not coming back. That was before 24-hour cable news, the Internet and yoga. And though both took place in the Fifties, it was before M*A*S*H. It was before AfterM*A*S*H. A lot has changed.

But I digress. I also believe that asking journalists to testify about their sources will only encourage more government secrecy. Anonymous leaks were essential in major cases like Watergate and the Pentagon Papers. In fact, it was an anonymous leak that made this whole Plame investigation possible in the first place! So let's not throw the baby out with the wife-smearers.

Despite my closeness to the case, I don't know what the final outcome of this whole drama will be. Will the indictments stop with Rove & Libby, or go even higher up - to Vice President Cheney? Or might they ensnare someone relatively powerless, like the president himself? We'll have to wait and see.

For now, good night and good cuticles.