British journalists chosen by billionaire Jeff Bezos to relaunch the Washington Post have been put on the defensive by a series of articles in the American media questioning their professional ethics.
The daily itself published a long investigation on Sunday exploring the past of its editor, William Lewis, who took office in January, and of a long-time collaborator, Robert Winnett, who is due to start as deputy editor in the fall.
“I’m proud to work with colleagues who aren’t afraid to scrutinize those in power. And even the new boss,” said newsroom employee Fenit Nirappil on X to underline the unusual nature of the exercise.
The Washington Post article suggests, among other things, that Mr. Lewis wrote an article in 2004, while working at the Sunday Times, on the situation of a professional soccer team that was derived from information potentially illicitly obtained by an investigator. private, John Ford, working for the British weekly, one of the largest in the United Kingdom.
Mr. Ford has previously stated that he was informally recruited to obtain confidential information by misleading people about his true identity and intentions.
Robert Winnett is said to have used a similar ploy, again relying on the action of Mr. Ford, to produce an article in 2002 identifying a list of British personalities who wished to obtain an old model Mercedes limousine described as “the limousine of the Nazis » due to its popularity in Germany in the 1930s.
Mr. Winnett is also accused in the Washington Post article of having personally intervened to help the investigator when he found himself in the crosshairs of justice for having attempted to illegally obtain a copy from a book by former British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
While they both worked for the newspaper The Telegraph, the two British journalists also collaborated in 2009 on a shocking series dealing with excessive spending by MPs which would have been made possible by the purchase of data from an investigator for more than $130,000. This type of payment is seen as unethical by major American media.
The cavalier practices of some British media turned scandalous at the time when it was revealed that a tabloid owned by media mogul Rupert Murdoch had hacked the communications of celebrities, politicians and crime victims to obtain private information.
However, a British court recently approved a lawsuit by known hacking victims, including Prince Harry, who suspect the publisher of having participated at the time in a plot to cover up the scandal.
The New York Times recently reported that Mr. Lewis had also intervened within the editorial staff of the Washington Post in May to discourage an editorial manager, Sally Buzbee, from publishing an article on this subject.
The manager subsequently resigned to protest against a reorganization of the newsroom deemed necessary by the publisher to revive the daily, which loses tens of millions of dollars per year.
Journalist David Folkenflik claims the publisher offered him an exclusive interview related to his arrival at the Washington Post in exchange for his silence. The ploy did not work, and NPR moved forward with its reporting.
All these developments are fueling discontent within the newsroom of the Washington Post, which remains, despite its difficulties, one of the most influential American media outlets.
It was not possible to know on Monday from the management of the daily whether the behavior of the two targeted leaders was the subject of internal checks. The journalists’ union did not respond to our requests for an interview.
Margaret Sullivan, a media analyst at Columbia University, asked wryly on Sunday’s British accent.”