Tommy Christopher Fundamentally Misunderstands the Role of a Journalist (Update: Grilled?)

Update: See below for Mediaite’s reporting on this “question.”

So via Jeff Poor we get this video of Tommy Christopher asking a question during today’s White House press briefing with White House spokesmodel Jay Carney:

Mr. Poor calls it the “dumbest question in history of White House press briefings.”  Meanwhile, Mr. Christopher is basking in his own brilliance:

Wingers shockingly missing the point of my question.
— Tommy Christopher (@tommyxtopher) October 15, 2013

Well, respectfully to Mr. Poor, it is not a dumb question.  And not-so-respectfully to Tommy Chrisopher...

No, you're missing the point of being a reporter RT @tommyxtopher: Wingers shockingly missing the point of my question.
— Aaron Worthing (@AaronWorthing) October 15, 2013

Consider this my expansion on this point.

Tommy... can I call you Tommy?  And no I am not going to worry overly much about whether your name is really Tommy or Thomas.  What do I care if you want to write under a pseudonym?  But we’ll return to that in a moment.

See, Tommy, the problem isn’t that your question was stupid so much as that it wasn’t a question.  It was thinly-disguised advocacy.

Ask yourself this, Tommy.  Who were the reporters there to hear from?  Wasn’t it Jay Carney?  Hey, as my characterization of him as a “spokesmodel” indicates, I don’t think very highly of the role of the White House Press Secretary, whichever party is being served.  I don’t take what they say very seriously and I don’t believe these white house press briefings are actually very useful.  But other people do.

Look at Carney’s eyes as he answered your “question.”  He was embarrassed by it.  That is why he ignored your whole “delay heart attacks” issue, because even he knew it was advocacy—and sycophantic advocacy at that.

See, let’s circle back to the issue of your real name.  You don’t think it matters, but why not?  “Because I am not part of the story,” you are likely to say.  But today you were the story.  You even added, dropping all pretense of being a reporter questioning a subject:

“Just for what it’s worth, I was able to enroll in the exchange about a week and a half ago,” Christopher said. “I haven’t picked a plan yet, though.”

See, that makes you and your story—and therefore your name—relevant.  Can you prove you actually had a heart attack?  Can you prove you successfully enrolled in Obamacare?  Can we see the records, with your actual name on it?

Mind you, I am not actually asking.  I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt on those points.  But do you see the problem when you come in there and advocate a position, rather than ask a question, and even drag your personal experiences into it?  Can anyone even remember what Carney said in reply?  I am in danger of falling into a coma every time he talks.  Is anyone talking about what he said?  No.  But they are talking about you, because you made yourself the story.

Indeed, what you have told the world is that you think your financial stability rides on the success of Obamacare.  So isn’t that a reason why maybe you shouldn’t be covering the subject as a reporter, because it might be hard to be objective and stick to the facts?  And combine that with the fact that you seem to have completely forgotten your role as a reporter, it suggests that Mediaite should prohibit you from reporting on Obamacare from now on.  You clearly have no ability to be objective on this subject.

And actually your argument is kind of ignorant.  Right now, if you have another heart attack and you have no insurance, the hospital will have to treat you, whether you can pay or not.  And if you can’t, then the cost is passed to the paying patients.  I’m not thrilled with that system, but contrary to what you suggested, people are not going to die of heart attacks if Obamacare is delayed.  In your case, it is very likely that the hospital will feel it can expect to collect from you and thus either you will voluntarily give up a huge chunk of change out of your wallet if one should happen, or you will be sued and lose that chunk of change involunarily.  Either way, it is a financial disaster for you.  But that is what you are faced with: not dying, but dire economic harm.

So in essence you like Obamacare because you think it is a better deal financially.  There's nothing wrong with that, although it seems like a poor excuse for a deeper invasion of our privacy than banning abortion and a violation of our Constitution.  But I guess asking if we can delay medical bills from heart attacks for a year is not as sexy, in your mind.

You want to a pundit, fine: be a pundit.  But when you step into that White House press room, you are a reporter.  They are not there to hear your opinion and you are not there to suck up to the White House.  You are there to ask tough questions and to challenge them.

So do your job, Tommy.  Or give up your seat to someone who will.

Update: So Mediaite talks about the question and um... this is their headline:

Mediaite’s Tommy Christopher Grills Jay Carney: If Obamacare Delayed, Will GOP ‘Delay Heart Attacks?’

And that isn’t just in the headline, it’s in the text, too:

Mediaite’s Tommy Christopher grilled White House Press Sec. Jay Carney on Tuesday over the status of negotiations between Congressional Republicans, Senate Democrats and the White House on a plan to raise the debt ceiling and reopen government.

To their credit they go over the questions, including a few I didn’t mention, so readers will figure out by the end that this is not a grilling, but I had to make a comment:

You misspelled "sucked up to" accidentally writing it as "grills." I know, autocorrect cn do crazy things @Mediaite @NoahCRothman @rsmccain
— Aaron Worthing (@AaronWorthing) October 15, 2013

(I always hate how sometimes you get right at the 140 character limit and you are forced to do a grammatical crime to make it fit.  So obvious “cn” means “can.”)

Anyway, this is shameful on the part of Mediaite, to pretend that Tommy Christopher was doing anything but advocating in the guise of questioning, and sucking up in the process.  This was unprofessional and that needs to be addressed.

---------------------------------------

Disclaimer:

I have accused some people, particularly Brett Kimberlin, of reprehensible conduct.  In some cases, the conduct is even criminal.  In all cases, the only justice I want is through the appropriate legal process—such as the criminal justice system.  I do not want to see vigilante violence against any person or any threat of such violence.  This kind of conduct is not only morally wrong, but it is counter-productive.

In the particular case of Brett Kimberlin, I do not want you to even contact him.  Do not call him.  Do not write him a letter.  Do not write him an email.  Do not text-message him.  Do not engage in any kind of directed communication.  I say this in part because under Maryland law, that can quickly become harassment and I don’t want that to happen to him.

And for that matter, don’t go on his property.  Don’t sneak around and try to photograph him.  Frankly try not to even be within his field of vision.  Your behavior could quickly cross the line into harassment in that way too (not to mention trespass and other concerns).

And do not contact his organizations, either.  And most of all, leave his family alone.

The only exception to all that is that if you are reporting on this, there is of course nothing wrong with contacting him for things like his official response to any stories you might report.  And even then if he tells you to stop contacting him, obey that request.  That this is a key element in making out a harassment claim under Maryland law—that a person asks you to stop and you refuse.

And let me say something else.  In my heart of hearts, I don’t believe that any person supporting me has done any of the above.  But if any of you have, stop it, and if you haven’t don’t start.