WONKETTE EXCLUSIVE!!! MUST CREDIT WONKETTE!! AD NAGS SPEAKS! ADAM NAGOURNEY GOES ON THE RECORD ABOUT HIS BLOG!!
We're big fans of Ad Nags, the blog of NYT reporter Adam Nagourney. Some people have speculated that the site is not actually the work of Nagourney but rather some amateurish hoax designed to mock the distinguished Timesman and to propagate a bunch of inside jokes and unsourced gossip. Obviously, we don't care one way or another. We did, however, get somebody's email address and emailed him a few thoughtful, serious questions. Which he answered in an appropriate manner. (Interview continues after the jump):
WONKETTE: Hey, it's really cool that the Times lets you blog! Do they put any restrictions on you at all? Also: why did you start it? It seems like you've got enough of a forum in the Times proper...
ADAM NAGOURNEY: I don't know how comfortable I feel about discussing it. It's a personal blog. Posts and comments are restricted for my posse--I call them the Nag Hags! Though my blog's been buggy lately and sometimes spammers get in. Nobody puts any restrictions on me, not The Times, not my parents--nobody. The best thing about a blog is that on the internet you can be as tall as you want to be.
I started to blog basically just to vent. I used to take self-portrait photos but Charlie Rose (I call him Charlie) told me photography was a bit fey. As a journalist, I have a lot of secrets and I also have to pretend to be objective, which means that I actually have to come off as pro- administration so that there's no chance of me seeing my bias in my own writing. This gets stressful and ADNAGS is a release.
WONKETTE: You get a lot comments from a lot of big-time journalists, yet I can't help but notice that some of them spell their own names wrong. Are they lazy? Stupid? Drunk? Drunk with power?
ADAM NAGOURNEY: HA! That's a good one.
No, They're all really cool. We're all journalists and misspellings is one of the way we make jokes. If you were a real journalist you'd get it.
WONKETTE: There a pretty consistent thread in the blog about you having some kind of pro-Bush bias. This is not, it's safe to say, something normally associated with Times folk. Can you explain what you bias is? If there are any, natch.
ADAM NAGOURNEY: Natch is cool. I'm going to use that, O.K.
"This is not, it's safe to say, something normally associated with Times folk."
Hah. You're good. Let's just say Judy Miller isn't the only one who loves to play "hide the chalabi". But seriously, your comment is exactly why it's important that some of The Times people write with an overtly pro-administration bias- how else can we remain credible? It is important that I write in such a way as to hide that which is inside me and that i am concerned seeps out of my pores. (I like poetry but I beg you, beg you to never mention that.) This question is annoying because it causes me too reveal myself, too much to myself. (When I get like this I have to sit down and meander through my past party invite collection) I explained above I am pro- Bush and I don't want to talk about it anymore. You are an idiot.
WONKETTE: Is Campbell Brown really that skanky?
ADAM NAGOURNEY: Honestly, I think that is an inappropriate question.