Via John at AMERICAblog, Newsweek has a 3 pager on Kos and his growing influence in the Democratic Party. Aravosis calls it a "good story," and I suppose, to the extent that perception of power equals reality of power in the bubble of DC politics, then it's "good" that establishment reporters and bubble-minded politicians believe that Kos is someone who has weight to throw around, with the prospects of becoming a kingmaker. Because it means they will pay attention to him.
But the story itself is overly suffused with the odor of misinformed excrement. The reporter, Jonathan Darman, more than once uses the term "paranoia" in describing Markos. Even in its non-clinical meanings - "extreme, irrational distrust of others" and "a tendency on the part of an individual or group toward excessive or irrational suspiciousness and distrustfulness of others" - the characterization is egregiously false, and has the appearance rather much more as a smear than an act of responsible journalism.
And more significant, Markos has routinely made clear - by fact of action as well as explicit word - that his primary goal is to give voice to and empower people who remain outside the privileged feudal estates controlled by establishment DC journalists and politicians. Moreover, his audacious "leftist liberalism" is plainly dedicated to getting moderate and conservative Democrats elected, in places where they represent the best chances for the Democratic Party. With the solitary caveat being that they support Democrats and criticize Republicans, and not the other way around. Apparently none of this fit with Newsweek's preconceived establishmentarian storyline.
The report isn't a total hatchet job, and it does give passing mention to Markos' electoral pragmatism. But it is overly suffused with misinformed drek.
Please consider supporting our work.
I hope you found this article important. Before you leave, I want to ask you to consider supporting our work with a donation. In These Times needs readers like you to help sustain our mission. We don’t depend on—or want—corporate advertising or deep-pocketed billionaires to fund our journalism. We’re supported by you, the reader, so we can focus on covering the issues that matter most to the progressive movement without fear or compromise.
Our work isn’t hidden behind a paywall because of people like you who support our journalism. We want to keep it that way. If you value the work we do and the movements we cover, please consider donating to In These Times.
