Return of the bulge

Remember the bulge? Remember how David Lindorff reported that the New York Times was going to report on the story after NASA scientist Robert Nelson climbed on board, but the editors decided to kill it? Well, the "killing" has now been confirmed:

According to executive editor Bill Keller, “In the end, nobody, including the scientist who brought it up, could take the story beyond speculation. In the crush of election-finale stories, it died a quiet, unlamented death.”

The photographic evidence was not speculative. It was photographic evidence.

Revkin, for one, wished it had run. Here’s what he told me in an e-mail message:

"I can appreciate the broader factors weighing on the paper's top editors, particularly that close to the election. But personally, I think that Nelson's assertions did rise above the level of garden-variety speculation, mainly because of who he is. Here was a veteran government scientist, whose decades-long career revolves around interpreting imagery like features of Mars, who decided to say very publicly that, without reservation, he was convinced there was something under a president's jacket when the White House said there was nothing.

"He essentially put his hard-won reputation utterly on the line (not to mention his job) in doing so and certainly with little prospect that he might gain something as a result -- except, as he put it, his preserved integrity."

Revkin also told me that before Nelson called Broad, he had approached other media outlets as well. None — until Salon — published anything on Nelson’s analysis. "I'd certainly choose [Nelson’s] opinion over that of a tailor," Revkin concluded, referring to news reports that cited the man who makes the president’s suits. "Hard to believe that so many in the media chose the tailor, even in coverage after the election."

Harder still to believe that no-one in the media noticed the dichotomous reaction of the White House.

When the administration said "There's nothing there but an odd fold in the material," the mainstream media repeated the line. And they interviewed Bilbo de Paris, or whatever his name is, because the tailor provided a "hook" which made the line easier to sell.

When the Secret Service changed the story and said "It's a bulletproof vest," the reporters decided that the bulge really did exist. And they went back to Bilbo for more confirmation.

Odd that no-one addressed the fact that the administration had lied for weeks. Odd that so many people were able to convince themselves that the photographs showed something other than the obvious. Odd that the "bulletproof vest" explanation took hold so rapidly, even though no-one has shown me a picture of a vest that would create such a bulge.

Early on, I told Salon that I was persuaded but not convinced that Bush wore a wire. Now I'm convinced. Most people don't lie without good reason.