The iceberg cometh: Maggie Gallagher was on the Bush payroll


Following revelations that Armstrong Williams was being paid to hawk No Child Left Behind for the administration, we've recently learned that columnist Maggie Gallagher has been pushing Bush's anti-gay hatemongering (er, sorry, Marriage Initiative) and extolling the sanctity of marriage in exchange for cold, hard cash.

From the Progress Report:
In 2002, syndicated columnist Maggie Gallagher staunchly defended the Bush marriage initiative in any venue that would give her space without disclosing that she was under a $20,000-plus contract with the Department of Health and Human Services to promote the proposal. She "received an additional $20,000 from the Bush Administration" for authoring a report, "titled 'Can Government Strengthen Marriage?', for a private organization." In one of her columns, Gallagher goes on to plug this same policy brief and encourages HHS to implement it, of course, without mentioning her financial connection. After the Armstrong Williams debacle, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan rebuffed questions about whether there were additional commentators on the government dole, saying, "I'm not aware of any others that are under contract."

Let's assume for a moment that McClellan is lying or deliberately being kept out of the loop -- let's assume that Gallagher and Williams don't represent 100% of the Bush contract recipients and that these are just two nipples of a Grand Tetons of propaganda payola.

What is the upshot of this? Are these "journalists" just scamming the administration, taking money in exchange for making statements and writing articles that they would have written anyway? Or is the money actually changing the positions that they take?

Does it matter?

Is a journalist under an ethical obligation to disclose any financial incentives that he or she might have for taking sides in an issue? A legal obligation?

Posted: Wed - January 26, 2005 at 10:39 AM   | Category:     |   |   | |



©
eXTReMe Tracker