On the front page of The Los Angeles Times this morning is a sharp story on the the Federal Drug Administration, and its virtually non-existent oversight of a peanut processing plant in Georgia. Because the plant was "filthy" and because the government farmed out oversight to a state agency that looked the other way, hundreds of people around the country have gotten sick, and eight have died.
But for press hounds, the real news is the way the FDA admitted its culpability…in a tiny change in an online reporting document:
If you follow the link to the "online report" (a pdf file) you'll see a form with all sorts of dreary details. This is half-admission, half-cover up. The agency was clearly hoping that reporters' eyes would glaze over and no one would notice their culpability. This would have worked, as it probably has worked in the past — without our knowledge — had not people around the country died from contaminated peanut products. This forced reporters to pay attention.
This new kind of quasi-lie lie seems to becoming increasingly common in D.C…for instance, the way NASA under the Bush administration casually changed the mission statement, dropping all references to "protecting the home planet."
Only James Hansen seemed to notice, and by then, it was too late.
Why did the FDA misinform this way, even after the demise of the Bush administration? Well, hard-bitten (and witty) Post reporter Dana Milbank, famed for his amusing Washington Sketch, offers a hint, in a freewheeling on-line chat with readers. A reader in Illinois remarks:
Evanston, Ill.: If you lose your job you could become a PR flack
for the government or corporate America. A cynic would say most
journalists already are. Not the Washington Sketch of course.
As long as I don't have to be the FDA flack at the next killer peanut butter hearing.
Kit Stolz 