Comments on: The Washington Post bets its brand on Circus Maximus II

By: Tom Grubisich

Tom Grubisich — Sat, 29 May 2010 11:16:56 +0000

I’m not suggesting that the Post has given up deep policy-based reporting. I cite recent Pulitzers the paper has won showing it hasn’t abandoned that legacy. But I think the new Post Politics section sends a message that the Post is now paying more attention to all-politics-all-the-time coverage just when the return of big ideas makes the mix of policy-and-politics a better bet for protecting the Post brand.

By: 98.231.178.193

98.231.178.193 — Fri, 28 May 2010 17:54:41 +0000

I am not suggesting that the Post has abandoned deep reporting — to which my reference to recent Pulitzers that the paper has won for doing just that attests. But when the Post creates a new section of Washington coverage that so aggressively emphasizes the content of what I call Circus Maximus II, that’s misguided. Why can’t the Post create a section on Washington coverage that more boldly, and innovatively, navigates the intersection of policy and politics?

By: 67.72.118.244

67.72.118.244 — Wed, 26 May 2010 10:07:22 +0000

Are you suggesting that the creation of postpolitics.com occurred at the expense of deep reporting by The Post on policy issues? If so, I think you need to spend more time on washingtonpost.com. The Post continues to provide excellent coverage of policy issues. PostPolitics.com, rightly, seems to be aimed at the Beltway audience that Politico is serving. But to assert that PostPolitics.com is The Post’s sole journalistic investment in serious matters of policy is wrong.

Could The Post do a better job of using the Web to add multiple layers to its policy coverage? You bet. Same can be said about every news org out there, including Web-only operations like ProPublica.

Full disclosure — I worked at washingtonpost.com for 7 years.