AP Self-Destructing? Uber-bloggers?

Between TalkingPointsMemo's followup on Ron Fournier's friendly words of encouragement to Karl Rove and JedReport's highlighting of Liz Sidoti's gift of sprinkled donuts and coffee (just like on the double talk express bus), Nedra Pickler's dubious contributions, Beth Fouhy's gooey "I miss Hillary" gusher, you have to shake your head and wonder what's happened to the AP.

Steve Benen identified some more head-scratchers:

I suppose the first time I noticed this "new" AP came in March, when Fournier wrote an item -- whether it was a news article or an opinion piece was unclear -- that said Barack Obama is "bordering on arrogance," "a bit too cocky," and that the senator and his wife "ooze a sense of entitlement." To substantiate the criticism, Fournier pointed to ... not a whole lot. It was basically the Republicans' "uppity" talking point in the form of an AP article.

But the AP's coverage has deteriorated since -- and it goes beyond just the AP giving John McCain donuts and McCain giving the AP barbecue. There was the slam-job on Obama that read like an RNC oppo dump, followed by a scathing, 900-word reprimand of Obama's decision to bypass the public financing system in the general election, filled with errors of fact and judgment.

When Obama unveiled his faith-based plan, the AP got the story backwards. When Obama talked about his Iraq policy on July 3, the AP said he'd "opened the door" to reversing course, even though he hadn't.

The AP's David Espo wrote a hagiographic, 1,200-word piece, praising McCain's "singular brand of combative bipartisanship," which was utterly ridiculous.

The AP pushed the objectivity envelope a little further with a mind-numbing, 1,100-word piece on Obama "being shadowed by giant flip-flops."

The AP flubbed the story on McCain joking about killing Iranians, and then flubbed the story about McCain's promise to eliminate the deficit. It's part of a very discouraging trend for the AP that's been ongoing for a while now.

Per Steve and Michael Calderone at Politico, the responsible party is the relatively new bureau chief, Ron Fournier who took over in May 2008. His predecessor, Sandy Johnson who was ousted in an unfriendly turnover regards him "as a threat to one of the most influential institutions in American journalism."

"I loved the Washington bureau," said Johnson, who left the AP after losing the prestigious position. "I just hope he doesn't destroy it."

It seems that all of this insertion of opinion and attitude into the AP's daily reporting is deliberate as part of Fournier's "accountability journalism". Politico noted:

Fournier himself, shortly before taking the job as bureau chief, wrote several models for what he's called "accountability journalism." A January lead declared that "Obama is bordering on arrogance." A month later, he began a column with "The Democratic nomination is now Barack Obama's to lose."

Fournier and other critics of the conventional press model, especially those on the left, have said that being released from the tired conventions of news writing is exactly what journalism needs.

By these lights, the mentality that presumes both sides of an argument are entitled to equal weight is what prevented the media from challenging the Bush administration more aggressively on the Iraq war and other issues.

Others warn that what Fournier and other proponents see as truth-telling can easily bleed into opinionizing -- exactly the opposite of the AP's mission of "delivering fast, unbiased news."

The real question comes down to what do you pick as facts. There's this at the end of Calderone's article:

"But boy, when we can cut through the clutter, and we can say 'Barack Obama put politics over his word,' which he did -- that's a fact," Fournier said. "He did. He may not like the way Liz wrote it, but it is a statement of fact."

No, Ron, it isn't a statement of fact. At no time did Barack Obama ever promise to take public financing. You may not like that point because it destroys your great lead but it's true.

So, the lesson here is to start regarding the AP as uber-bloggers -- a group of writers doing news-based items wrapped in their opinions which they may or may not identify as facts whether or not they are truly facts.

You can take away the question mark on the title of this piece. It's definitely: