Predictably, a great many people (read: journalists) were less than thrilled to see the New York Times anoint Politico’s Mike Allen the most influential journalist in Washington. In his WaPo column today Howie Kurtz politely suggests it might be otherwise.
But is even a master aggregator a Washington power broker? (Allen breaks some stories too, but that’s not the reason he became a cover boy.) Or is he a symbol of the clout of Politico, whose fast-paced metabolism has upended the established journalistic order headed by, yes, the New York Times?
There’s another possibility: that the story was written from deep within the Beltway bubble, by and for Washington insiders. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. But it means Allen’s influence may be contained to a limited sphere, like the ruler of a tiny island kingdom.
And then in an effort to make his point Kurtz pulls three rather long blog excerpts from other Washington insiders whose conclusion dovetails with his (Marc Ambinder, Ian Shapira, Jeffrey Goldberg), namely that longform, investigative journalism is still way more important than some cobbled together daily newsletter. Yes it is. Same as the New Yorker is obviously far more important than People…but which are you more likely to pick up and scan in the waiting room?
Have a tip we should know? firstname.lastname@example.org