When I was an editor at Spy a couple of decades ago, we used to run an item called The Spy List, which was almost invariably a simple set of names that were connected by–well, that was for the reader to figure out, or to speculate upon. Basically it was a way we could print rumors about people without risking the moral or legal consequences of spreading gossip initiated by unnamed and perhaps unreliable sources. And we were able to get away with it because we operated out on the edge, at a deliberate distance from the mainstream.
The Wall Street Journal, which fancies itself a mainstream, important, powerful newspaper, veered sharply into the heart of Spy List territory the other day when it published on its front page a 17 year-old photograph of Solicitor General Elena Kagan, now a nominee to the Supreme Court, playing softball. Published rumors in recent weeks have held that Ms. Kagan is a lesbian, which she denies and which the White House refuses to discuss. As well they should–it’s no one’s business. And no respectable newspaper would introduce the question in a straightforward way. But a partisan newspaper just might find a way to introduce the topic in a low, mean, back-handed way.
A newspaper might well have good reason for publishing a photo of a person in the news engaged in some leisure activity, and a current photo of the new Supreme Court nominee kicking back with friends would be a perfectly appropriate picture to publish, and on the front page. But a 17 year-old picture of the nominee? You might run that inside, in the context of a profile of this person in the news, in the midst of baby pictures, graduation photos, shots of early achievement, and so on.
But a 17 year old photo on the front page, unaccompanied by an article, apropos of nothing in the news? Not only is that not the sort of thing that serious newspapers do; it’s the sort of thing that is ordinarily called a mistake and that costs people their jobs. It’s simply not newsworthy, and in a week where oil continues to flow, the Icelandic volcano continues to spew, Great Britain settles on a new prime minister, amid other events, using precious front page acreage on this type of photo would ordinarily constitute journalistic malpractice. It would be stupid.
But the editors at the Journal aren’t stupid. They’re cynical. They’ve coyly introduced the topic of Ms. Kagan’s sexual orientation into public discussion, and caused people to discuss the paper, which should impress their boss. They should be proud–all it’s cost them is honor.