Did Alter, Dowd And Healy Mislead Readers On The Clinton-Rose Interview?

Media Matters criticizes Jonathan Alter — as well as Maureen Dowd and Patrick Healy of The New York Times — for misleading the public on the reason why Bill Clinton’s aides wanted to end his now-infamous Charlie Rose Show interview.

In omitting the comments, Alter joined New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd and New York Times reporter Patrick Healy in publishing a misleading account of Clinton’s interview with Rose. Dowd claimed, ”He [Clinton] got so agitated with Charlie Rose — ranting that reporters were ‘stenographers’ for Obama — that his aides tried to stop the interview”; Healy wrote that ”[a]t one point, Mr. Rose said that, in his control room, aides to Mr. Clinton were trying to persuade the show’s producers to end the interview.” Like Alter, neither Dowd nor Healy noted Rose’s on-air comments about why Clinton’s aides wanted to end the interview.

Rose said on-air ”we’re over and your people need to take you — you need to go wherever you need to go.” The transcript shows no causal relation between Rose’s line of questioning and Clinton’s staff wanting to end the interview.