On March 10, 2008, the New York Times broke the story of former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer's hooker habit, and cable news went insane. One of the gratifying things we found in the 1,300 pages of e-mail correspondence between Spitzer's flacks and reporters (which we obtained under New York's public records law) was that some reporters who were booked as talking heads actually made an effort to know what they were talking about before they went on TV. Of course, it's hard to get too much information at the last minute — which is one reason no one on cable television knows what they are talking about — and often the natural impulse of reporters is to check in with a flack for guidance.

The day after the Spitzer news broke, as speculation over his future was at a fever pitch, Financial Times reporter Brooke Masters, who wrote a book in 2006 about Spitzer's rise to power, was booked to appear on CNN. She sent a frantic e-mail to Spitzer's communications director Christine Anderson ten minutes before she was scheduled to go on, asking, "what tone should I take when asked if he will resign?" She signed off with, "Help."

Anderson responded that no announcement would be coming that day, but that Masters' "tone should probably be that the options aren't good." On CNN that night, in a taped segment for Anderson Cooper 360, Masters said, "Unless he can completely reinvent himself, his old method of dealing with the world and his old attraction as a politician is gone."

When we let Masters know that we were publishing the exchange, she wrote in an e-mail that "I knew I was going to be asked what Mr Spitzer would do, and I am a reporter not a pundit so I was trying to gather the facts." Which we commend her for. Still, it's worth remembering the next time you see a reporter analyzing a story on cable somewhere, that — at least for the ones who did their homework — the facts, and the tone, sometimes come unattributed and off the record from people who are paid to manage reporters.

Another reporter who checked in with Anderson before going on TV was them-Time magazine deputy managing editor Adi Ignatius, who now edits the Harvard Business Review. Oddly, Ignatius — who had covered and profiled Spitzer for Time — was booked on ABC News and NBC News as a supporter of Spitzer's, to balance out the detractors offering gleeful quotes on his self-immolation.

On March 10, a few hours after the story broke, Ignatius e-mailed Spitzer's chief of staff Marlene Turner asking if he could speak to Spitzer or anyone else in his office about the governor's state of mind before going on ABC News's World News Tonight. Turner referred him to Anderson. World News didn't use any of Ignatius' tape, but the next day, NBC Nightly News invited him to speak as "someone who knows and likes Eliot," and he asked Anderson for access to Spitzer or anybody else who might know his thinking. Anderson responded that she'd be happy to talk to him.

That night, Ignatius was identified on a Nightly News segment as a Spitzer "supporter," and he told correspondent Mike Taibbi that "it's going to be very, very, very difficult for him to stay in office."

Ignatius and Masters were right to find out as much as they could before being presented to television audiences as informed analysts (or in Ignatius' case, a partisan). But it's interesting, to us at least, to see laid bare the role that flacks can play behind the scenes in managing the tone and direction of talking-head coverage during a PR disaster.

A scan of the contents (PDF) reveals a fairly dry collection of fake stories about the detrimental effects of capitalism on the environment, along with fake ads and fake sections correct right down to the back-page Lex column.

Unlike the Yes Men, these pranksters, led by blogger Raoul Djukanovic, aren't making any mystery of their identities. In a press release (see below), they said they collected donations through the internet and printed "tens of thousands of copies... almost as many as the FT sells here daily." Volunteers then fanned out to distribute the 12-page paper in London (the printed paper can be seen in the videos here).

Whether the paper will strike a meaningful blow against unbridled capitalism is up for debate. But that so much money was spent printing it suggests that the Web won't rout dead trees from every last news niche: There appears to be no substitute for paper as a vessel for emotional watersheds, be it an activist group's proselytizing (resonant to the group if no one else), a racially and politically momentous inauguration or the rise of a dreaded enemy.

In other words, the newspaper will remain as a powerful cultural icon long after it ceases to have much point as a communications medium. Good look making much money off that, though, unless you sell one last gullible billionaire on living his childhood publishing dream.

Press release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

27 MARCH 2009

Fake FT wakes up London to radical action

Concerned Londoners today handed out copies of a spoof Financial Times, urging journalists and big business to make the future possible by putting people first.

Set in 2020, the 12-page paper revealed how action in 2009 reined in climate change, saving billions from extinction. Carbon rationing didn't kill us, it explained, despite the inconvenience to multinational companies. But we couldn't have endless growth with finite resources. Editors even apologised for suggesting otherwise.

"We live on financial crimes," the paper confessed in a front-page advert, which satirised a recent Financial Times billboard. "In a world of cold harsh truths," it said, beside a panting St Bernard atop a mountain, "we rescue stories from the facts."

Launched at dawn from behind Waterloo station, this coup was aimed at everyone's excuses for apathy. Unless we change the way we live radically, we'll make our world uninhabitable within decades. It's time for drastic action, and if governments won't take it, we have to do something ourselves.

"Journalists frame public debate, and the City frames public policy," said Raoul Djukanovic, who edited today's fake FT. "If they reframed their thinking, they could help build a different world instead of conning us with lifestyle porn and bubbles."

The paper was a full-colour replica of the iconic pink ‘un, including news from Britain and abroad, and editorials and comment, poking fun at FT columnists. It was funded by donations on the Internet, and given away for free by volunteers. Tens of thousands of copies were printed – almost as many as the FT sells here daily.

Why bother, some commuters asked. "Newspapers won't change the world, but they do spread words that can make people think," said Marcos Marcuse, who handed out papers near London Bridge. "What are we going to tell our children? That we thought about trying to save ourselves, but it wasn't ‘good business' or ‘objective reporting'?"

Vanity Fair online editor Mike Hogan complained about the food at South By Southwest.

Washington Times columnist complained about a cell-phone using idiot at a White House press conference, whom she later identified as John Gizzi of Human Events.

Salon.com correspondent Mike Madden engaged in conversation with his readers.

Natalie Eshaya, a writer for Ryan Seacrest, outed her boss's drinking problem.

Chris Nuttall of the Financial Times experienced a moment of sheer geek panic.

See something worth noting on Twitter? Please email us your favorite tweets — or send us more Twitter usernames.

Mancunian editrix Louise Bolotin recounted her cat's lepidoptivorous habits.

Chris Nuttall of the Financial Times was so on vacation that he couldn't even type "holiday."

Geek videoblogger Veronica Belmont came up with a great new business model for Facebook.

British journalist Debbie James was grateful for fags, by which we think she meant "cigarettes."

VentureBeat editor Eric Eldon mindlessly fondled a gadget. Oh, is that what the kids are calling it?

Anyone else's tweets we should keep an eye on? Send us more Twitter usernames, please.

Locking Obama up before he even arrived in Washington turned into a brilliant steal for publisher Crown, but at the time the income from Obama's three book deal was crucial for the senator's rising star. Barnett made it happen for the young pol, and he did it far cheaper than most agents. Indeed, much of Barnett's success in attracted big-time clients can be traced back to his unusual practice of forgoing the usual commission on a book, and just billing his clients hourly for their time.

Barnett's influence doesn't end in the publishing world, as last decade he was given the unenviable task of informing Hillary Clinton about her husband's indiscretions with Monica Lewinsky. Despite being employed by friends on both side of the aisle, Barnett isn't universally admired. His first big sale was Geraldine Ferraro's autobiography Ferraro: My Story, and literary agent Esther Newberg doesn't recall Barnett having an impressive debut or career:

Esther Newberg is thanked for her contribution “above and beyond that of literary agent”. Newberg, whose clients include Thomas Friedman (currently number three on The New York Times non-fiction bestseller list) and Patricia Cornwell (number three on the mass-market fiction list), doesn’t agree with Barnett’s account of the Ferraro negotiations. “He didn’t work with me. He did the contracts later. I sold the book in an auction. He watched."

In part, it's Barnett's willingness to represent Republicans including Karl Rove, Paul Wolfowitz and Lynne Cheney that bothers Newberg.

She adds that "three-quarters of the people he [Barnett] represents are morally repugnant to me". Apprised of Newberg’s comments via e-mail, Barnett replied: “[She] taught me a lot, but seems to have regretted it – and been jealous about it – ever since.”

Indeed, Barnett's connections are so extensive that he's a fixture on The L Word chart:

image from Muckety

The Washington Insider Who Made Obama Rich [FT]

*Because it is sort of overpowered by the logic of "CNBC cannot tell everyone to put their money in Yen because the Bank Of Japan is not going to buy all their advertising slots duh." Actually, if they did tell their viewers to put all their money in Yen the Bank Of Japan might pay them just to stop, but that is a whole nother story.

• The Financial Times wrote of "financial chaos ... high drama ... [that] could lead to one of the most radical reshapings in Wall Street history.... [and has produced] increasingly desperate talks over the... state of the financial sector."
• The Journal added that "Lehman's collapse will send deep and painful ripple effects across the markets."
• The Times: "One of the most dramatic days in Wall Street history.... humbling moves which reshape the landscape of American finance."
• Andy Lynch, a fund manager at Schroder Investment Management in London, in the Times: "Today is the day historians will be writing about in years to come... The only thing that this comes near to during my career is Russia defaulting in 1989. But that was much shorter in time and the world economy was in a healthier state."
• Times reporter Andrew Ross Sorkin on CNBC: Said he's running on two hours sleep. Also, while today's events might seem "horrific," "you'll look back and this will be a good thing," this consolidation.
• Someone else on CNBC: There are only two large investment banks standing.
• Another CNBC talking head: "I don't see us emerging from this anytime soon."

• The article says, "T-Mobile did not return calls for comment." You know what that means. When a company won't talk, reporters craft a hitpiece.
• Says who? Vague unquoted anonymous sources include "Internet developers and mobile industry executives" and just three named ones — an analyst, music site Pandora's CTO, and an executive at T-Mobile rival Hutchison Whampoa.

These two facets of the story will give Googlers plenty of reason to dismiss the story. The notion that Googler groupthink won't allow them to process: That the article's right in all its particulars, anonymous sources or no. Oh, and have you ever heard a Googler complain when one of their executives is quoted spouting company talking points anonymously to the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal?

Doing so, I learned that three years after Microsoft poached him from his role as head of research at Yahoo, a guy named Gary Flake and his 150-person Live Labs team have come up with a product called Photosynth, which stitches images together to create larger images. But as you can tell by the above image — results for a search on "Mission District, San Franciso"— its search function doesn't really work. Also, none of it works on a Mac.

Disappointing. Not Microsoft's product, which is about what we'd expect from the software giant. No, I'm chastened by the FT. On New York's subway system, the pink paper it's printed on is supposed to signify that one looks down from high even on the guy holding the WSJ to your left. But being seen reading articles like this make one a laughingstock even to Murdoch's masses.

The tech and media business world, like any world, is full of people figuring out their relative worth. I mean more than pecking order; I mean that my time is worth much less than my boss's, and his time is worth much less than Rupert Murdoch's. The important measure is whether I'm worth five minutes, an hour, or a weekend of Murdoch's time. That way I know whether to approach him at a conference, ask him to lunch, or take him to Tahoe. The real answer is "none of the above," so I know that if I want anything from him, I'd better wait until I have an excuse.

Social networks flatten this relative value. On Facebook, if I'm your friend and you're Dame Judi Dench's friend, I might try to broker an introduction. I won't know that I'm worth an hour of your time each day and you're worth five minutes of hers each year.

Silicon Valley execs don't seem to get this, or any other simple principle about not wasting people's time. So they get their companies to finance every sort of conference and group membership (seriously I went to one all about making money from Facebook apps) where they can harass their superiors in the industry. Of course they'll come to a social network that supposedly makes everyone available!

Business plans in the Valley are bogglingly stupid. I met a likable but naive man who's building software that lets your car radio read blogs out loud to you. There's an entire funded company built around putting little "If you liked this, you'd also like..." notifications on blogs. Now imagine paying $4000 a year to get bothered by these people.

The only good networking is the kind that requires more than money.

FT is making the site mostly free, except for the heaviest of readers. Newspaper officials say they did "research" — imagine that, research! — and now will allow readers to view 30 articles a month before having to cough up some change.

Hardcore readers — likely current subscribers — will not see much change, since they'll have to pay to keep up with all of the coverage. But bloggers will be free to link to FT articles knowing their viewers can click through without trouble. This could be a happy medium between pay and content models. Time will tell. Meanwhile, we're giving the FT the award for worst self-referential headline ever: "FT.com pioneers change to charging." The newspaper ought to pay you for clicking through and reading that one. (Photo by jimwinstead)

He is simultaneously developing three of the five skyscrapers at Ground Zero, and his trio of eminent architects - Norman Foster, Richard Rogers and Fumihiko Maki - are working at a blistering pace to meet his tight deadlines. His position as the World Trade Center's main developer is at last secure, after an extraordinary six years in which he fought some of the world's largest insurance companies, the New York Police Department, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the governor of New York, City Hall, headstrong architects and widespread public doubts about his motivations.

He fought hard, and he won. And now he's not wasting time.

Silverstein has fought like hell for years to prove what a lot of people knew/feared from the beginning: that his lease, 580 pages of double-spaced 12-point Times Roman, was more durable than his buildings. So it's great to see the stubborn developer getting the pop-hero treatment he's earned, complete with mentions of shirt choice, footwear and skin care. His "let's get on with it" (the article's last line) should be the "let's roll" of 2007. Where's Pataki? Danny who? Larry won.

(Okay. Now do I get to take a spin on the "Silver Shalis"?)

Cometh the tower, cometh the man [FT]
[Image: A.P.]