More Lameness From Hiatt Releasing Froomkin

I could never see this happening to fresh new media writers like Broader, Ignatius and Krauthammer.

But then again, maybe I'm going to much into hyperbole.

Via Ms. Hamsher, here's the editor of what use to be a great newspaper explain some more why a journalist who Kos and Glenn Greenwald of all justified media critics fully respected and gave praise to.

As Jane notes about the whole traffic thing, and what Hiatt &crew really thought about Froomkin's post:

Take a look at the Post's Politics page. Do you see Dan Froomkin's column listed anywhere? Nope. Nor is it listed on the front page. If you want to find his White House Watch, you better know where to look for it.

The Post has been trying to kill off Froomkin's audience for a while. Anyone who writes for a web site knows that if you get no main page exposure -- or in this case, even a link on the Politics page -- your traffic is going to take a huge hit, regardless of the quality of your writing. It's like taking a baseball bat to someone's knees and then firing them because they can't walk.

You disappointingly won't see it anymore on there now if you didn't then.

Jane says it perfectly

Hiatt doesn't need to produce Froomkin's traffic figures -- he needs to explain why the Post has been actively trying to eradicate Froomkin's readership such that disingenuous arguments about "viewership data" could ultimately be made to justify sacking him.

I guess Froomkin wasn't adjusting to a new era after all. A new era of ass kissing and preserving the status quo.