Over at Media Matters for America, they didn't think our apology to Ben Affleck was quite so funny: "Newsweek's making fun of Affleck because he's an actor and everybody knows actors don't know anything about TARP, or journalism," writes Eric Boehlert. "That's why Newsweek didn't even bother to address the serious nature of Affleck's comments."
I'm sorry... but the serious nature of Ben Affleck's comments? Journalism criticism is one thing, but accusing us of actually influencing the economic bailout package? That's ludicrous thinking -- especially for a Cambridge boy like Affleck. But Boehlert continues, adding that one of our esteemed commenters got it right when he said, "I haven't seen much in the way of real, critical, responsible journalism in quite a while, and having some hipster [...] rail against the comments of some celebrity doesn't really break the funk."
It should be known that we probably would have railed on anyone, not just a celebrity, who conflated our King Henry cover with congressional policy. That said, sorry to offend people like New York University Journalism professor Jay Rosen, who took the time to respond to Readback on his twitter feed: "King Henry! Newsweek suggested he's the man for the moment. But Paulson had no idea what to do. Is Newsweek sorry? Uh, no."
Now's the time for a special thanks to New York Magazine for actually, you know, getting the joke. Lest we devote any more ink to Ben Affleck (and making all you other readers jealous), here's this piece from Jessica Pressler that appears in this week's issue. It's short, so here's the entirety:
Ben Affleck, like most Hollywood stars, thinks that magazine covers really matter. Last week, he was criticizing the TARP bill to a reporter for Politico and said that “Newsweek, I feel like, is basically culpable for the first [$350 billion],” referring to the weekly’s “King Henry” cover about Henry Paulson, which he called a “hagiography” as well as “presumptuous.” “I was surprised,” says the story’s author, Daniel Gross, who is, he noted, a fan of Good Will Hunting. “We called [Paulson] King Henry because, at that moment, he was the absolute monarch of the financial system,” he says. “He was the one deciding who should live and who should die.” And in September, it seemed like Paulson was making the right decisions. “Everyone forgets this, but when it happened, people thought it was a great idea to let Lehman Brothers fail.” Paulson’s bungled handling of the TARP happened later. Besides, “would that a Newsweek cover story mattered so much that it could sway policy and move markets,” says Gross. “It’s like blaming Gigli for Hollywood’s problems with DVD residuals.”
Enough said.
