Murray S. Waas (born 20 December 1981)[1] is an investigative journalist, best known most recently for his investigations for Reuters of the health insurance industry, and his earlier coverage of the Bush White House's planning for the 2003 invasion of Iraq and ensuing controversies and American political scandals such as the Plame affair (also known as the "CIA leak grand jury investigation", the "CIA leak scandal", and "Plamegate"). His articles about the later such matters have appeared in National Journal, where he has worked as a staff correspondent and contributing editor, The Atlantic, and, earlier the American Prospect.[2] Waas also comments on contemporary American political controversies in his personal blogs Whatever Already! and at The Huffington Post. An "instant book", the United States v. I. Lewis Libby which he edited, with research assistance by Jeff Lomonaco, was published by Union Square Press (an imprint of Sterling Publishing) in June 2007.[3][4]

Murray Waas

Over the course of a long career, Waas has written investigative series for the Los Angeles Times, the Boston Globe, and the Village Voice, where he had been a staff writer. His magazine articles have appeared in the New Yorker, the Atlantic, Harper's, the Nation, the New Repubic, and other national magazines. Most recently, Waas has been a staff correspondent and contributing editor to National Journal.

Murray Waas has been a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize, a winner of the Goldsmith Prize, and a winner of the Barlett & Steele Business Investigative Reporting Prize. He earlier had won a fellowship with the Alicia Patterson Foundation.


[hide]*1 Personal history

Personal historyEdit

Murray Waas was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and originally hoped to have a career in law and city politics ("To be the district attorney and mayor of the City of Philadelphia"), but he dropped out of George Washington University before graduating.[5]


In 1987, when Waas was only twenty-six years old, he learned that he had a life-threatening "advanced form" of cancer. On June 26, 2006, Washington Post media writer Howard Kurtz disclosed that Waas had been told that he had an "incurable Stage C" cancer and faced a "terminal diagnosis."[6][7]

Subsequently, Waas successfully sued the George Washington University Medical Center, which had negligently "failed to diagnose his cancer, winning a $650,000 judgment ... in a 1992 verdict ... upheld by the D.C. Court of Appeals."[6] Although, according to a pathologist hired by Waas to testify in the case, "90% of [such] patients die within two years," Waas survived and was later declared "cancer-free."[6][7] His recovery and survival were later described as a "miracle" by the medical team treating him."[6]

Although he initially shied away from writing about health care because of his history as a cancer survivor, in 2009 and 2010, Waas weighed in with a series of articles for Reuters, detailing how many of the nation's largest heatlh insurance companies, improperly, and even illegally, canceled the policies of tens of thousands of customers shortly after they were diagnosed with HIV, cancer, and other life threatening but costly diseases.[8][9] One story disclosed that the health insurer, WellPoint, using a computer algorithm, identified women recently diagnosed with breast cancer and then singled them out for cancelation of their policies.[10][11] The story not only caused considerable public outrage, but led Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, and President Barack Obama, to call on WellPoint to end the practice.[12][13][14]

Pressured by the Obama administration, WellPoint and the nation's other largest health insurers agreed to immediately end the practice.[15] Waas was credited with saving the lives of countless other cancer patients like himself, and making sure that thousands of other people did not have their insurance unfairly canceled.[16][17] [18] He won the Barlett & Steele Award for Business Investigative Reporting from the Walter Cronkite School of Arizona State University as well as other honors for the stories.[19][20]

Professional careerEdit

While still attending college, when he was eighteen and nineteen years old, Waas began working for American newspaper columnist Jack Anderson.[5]

According to his appreciation of Anderson that Waas published in the Village Voice, after the columnist's death at the age of 83:

The series of columns we [Anderson and Waas] produced regarding the role of U.S. companies doing business with Idi Amin were instrumental in leading to the imposition of U.S. economic sanctions against the Amin regime, according to the congressman who originally sponsored legislation seeking the sanctions, and other key congressional staffers who worked on the issue.

Some historians in turn say the sanctions may have played an instrumental role in Amin’s subsequent overthrow.[21]

Ralph Nurnberger, a former staffer on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and professor at Georgetown University, later concluded in a study for the African Studies Review that the economic sanctions imposed against Amin by the U.S. led to Amin's downfall.[22] Nurnberger wrote that the congressional initiative to impose the sanctions had garnered little attention or support until "Jack Anderson assigned one of his reporters, Murray Waas to follow the issue" and write regularly about it.[23] At the time, Anderson's columns were published in more than 1,000 newspapers, which in turn had 40 million readers. Waas was eighteen and nineteen years old at the time he wrote the columns.[24] [25]

Prior to his overthrow from power, Amin had been alleged to have engaged in genocide and killed between 150,000 and 300,000 of his own citizens. The late Sen. Frank Church (D-Id.), a chairman of the Senate Foreign Committee, later said the congressionally imposed boycott "contributed to the fall of Idi Amin." Sen. Mark Hatfield (R-Or.), said that the sanctions caused the conditions that "would come to break Amin's seemingly invincible survivability."[26]

During the Reagan administration, Waas was among a small group of reporters involved in breaking the story of the Iran-Contra affair.[2] Later, he also reported on Whitewater and the Clinton impeachment for[2]

Waas won an Alicia Patterson Journalism Fellowship[27] in 1992 to research and write about the rights of the institutionalized and incarcerated in the U.S. For his fellowship, he investigated substandard conditions and questionable deaths at institutions for the mentally retarded, mental hospitals, nursing homes, juvenile detention centers, and jails and prisons.[7]

As part of his work for the Alicia Patterson Foundation, Waas published a 7,912 word article in the Los Angeles Times on April 3, 1994 detailing how mentally retarded children institutionalized by the District of Columbia government had died because of abuse and neglect.[28] The story lead to renewed scrutiny by the U.S. Department of Justice of the city's treatment of its mentally retarded wards and spurred on the settlement of a civil suit brought against the city government by the parents of children who had died due to abuse or neglect.[29]

Following the presidency of George Herbert Walker Bush, in 1993, while a reporter for the The Los Angeles Times,Murray Waas was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in the category of national reporting for his stories detailing that administration's prewar foreign policy towards the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein.[30] That same year, Waas was also a recipient of the Goldsmith Prize for Investigative Reporting, awarded by the Joan Shorenstein Barone Center on The Press, of the John F. Kennedy School of Government of Harvard University, for "a series that detailed United States policy toward Iraq before the Persian Gulf war.[31][32][33]
Saddam hussein

More recently, he has worked as a national correspondent and contributing editor of National Journal.[2]

Summarizing the stories that Waas wrote for National Journal during 2005 and 2006 about the second Bush administration's policies that led up to war with Iraq, Washington Post online White House columnist Dan Froomkin, wrote on March 31, 2006:

Slowly but surely, investigative reporter Murray Waas has been putting together a compelling narrative about how President Bush and his top aides contrived their bogus case for war in Iraq; how they succeeded in keeping charges of deception from becoming a major issue in the 2004 election; and how they continue to keep most of the press off the trail to this day.
What emerges in Waas's stories is a consistent White House modus operandi: That time and time again, Bush and his aides have selectively leaked or declassified secret intelligence findings that served their political agenda -- while aggressively asserting the need to keep secret the information that would tend to discredit them.[34]
Writing about the same stories by Waas, New York journalism professor Jay Rosen said that the journalist was the "New Bob Woodward":
0 61 woodward bob journalist
By Woodward Now I mean the reporter who is actually doing what Woodward has a reputation for doing: finding, tracking, breaking into reportable parts—and then publishing—the biggest story in town. He’s also putting those parts together for us.
The Biggest Story in Town (almost a term of art in political Washington) is the one that would cause the biggest earthquake if the facts sealed inside it started coming out now. Today the biggest story in town is what really went down as the Bush team drove deceptively to war, and later tried to conceal how bad the deception—and decision-making—had been.

Also while writing about the second Bush administration's policies that led up to war with Iraq, Waas also reported about the investigation of CIA leak prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald's investigation as to who leaked covert CIA operative Valerie Plame's identity to the press-- illustrating in his reporting how the two stories were inexorably linked in that the effort to damage Plame was part of a broader Bush White House effort to discredit those who were alleging that it had misrepresented intelligence information to make the case to go to war.[35][36][37]

Plame's identity as a covert CIA agent was leaked to the media by senior Bush White House officials to discredit and retaliate against her husband, former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, who had alleged the Bush administration misrepresented intelligence information to make the case to go to war with Saddam Hussein. I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, the chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, was later convicted on federal charges of perjury and obstruction of justice in an attempt to conceal his own role and that of others in the Bush White House in outing Plame, although President Bush would later commute Libby's thirty month prison sentence.[38][39] Waas not only wrote the first story disclosing that Libby had leaked Plame's identity to New York Times reporter Judith Miller, but the same story also paved the way for Miller, then in jail for more than a hundred days, to be released and testify against Libby.[40]

On Aug. 6, 2005, Waas disclosed for the first time that it was Libby who had leaked Plame's name to Miller, writing: "I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, the chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, has told federal investigators that he met with New York Times reporter Judith Miller on July 8, 2003, and discussed CIA operative Valerie Plame, according to legal sources familiar with Libby's account."[41][42][43]

That same story also disclosed that Libby was encouraging Miller to stay in jail and not reveal that Libby was her source.[44] A short time later, citing the Waas story, prosecutor Fitzgerald wrote Libby's attorney, alleging that "Libby had simply decided that encouraging Ms. Miller to testify was not in his best interest" and that Libby discouraging Miller to testify might be an illegal effort to obstruct his investigation.[45] Libby then wrote and called Miller saying that it was alright for her to testify.[46] After spending more than a hundred days in jail, Miller was released, and provided testimony and evidence to prosecutors against Libby, that led to Libby's indictment, and subsequent conviction , on charges of obstruction of justice and perjury.[47][48] Washington Post media columnist Howard Kurtz wrote on April 17, 2006 that Waas' account "set in motion the waiver springing Miller from jail on contempt charges."[49][50]

During a May 15, 2006 interview with Elizabeth Halloran, of U.S. News and World Report, when she asked whether he was "working on stories other than those involving the Fitzgerald investigation," Waas indicated that he has "been working on a long, explanatory piece about healthcare issues, the cervical cancer vaccine." Among the questions that he raised with Halloran are: "Why isn't that vaccine going to get to the people it should get to? Is it going to be locked away?"[5] Main article: Cervarix

When Halloran went on to ask the subject of his "next story," Waas identified it as "another story about the level of knowledge among high-level administration officials about attempts to discredit Wilson and when they knew about it."[5] Waas had already reported on the CIA leak grand jury investigation of the public outing of Mrs. Wilson's then-classified covert CIA identity and the alleged involvement of officials in The White House in her outing, in his article concerning Wilson published in The Village Voice in October/November 2003, in which he concludes: "Of course, nobody would have been looking into Plame's background had White House officials not leaked her status as a clandestine CIA officer, and if Novak hadn't agreed to out her for the Bush administration in an attempt to discredit her husband."[51]

Several of Waas's later published accounts of that aspect of the Plame affair inform his Union Square Press book on the Libby trial published in June 2007, which he discusses in some detail in his interview with Amy Goodman on Democracy Now!.[3][52]

Book publication

The United States v. I. Lewis Libby, edited and with reporting by Waas, was published by Sterling Publishing's Union Square Press imprint on June 5, 2007.[53] [54] [55] Jeff Lomonaco, a professor of political science at the University of Minnesota, assisted Waas with research.[56][57]

The bulk of the book was an edited version of the trial transcript of the federal criminal trial of I. Lewis Libby, carefully culled from its original size of nearly a million words. The book also included an original essay written by Waas, entitled "The Last Compartment", which contained new information and reporting.[58] [59] The book's editor and publisher told USA Today that the book was an attempt to be "like the published reports from the 9/11 Commission and the Iraq Study Group" in both thoroughness and accuracy, providing additional context to the original documentary record, and adding new reporting and information.[60]

Reviewing the book in the Columbia Journalism Review, James Boylan, a contributing editor of the magazine, wrote for its November/December 2007 issue:

Murray Waas, a disciple of Jack Anderson, the ultimate outsider, has assembled a plump volume of the trial and grand-jury records in the case of I. Lewis Libby... convicted in March of obstruction of justice and lying in the case involving disclosure of the identity of CIA operative Valerie Plame. The transcripts make clear that Waas may have had less interest in Libby’s missteps than in the foibles of a cohort of Washington’s current insider journalists, among whom Tim Russert, Bob Woodward, Judith Miller (jailed for a time for refusing to testify), and Robert Novak... were the most celebrated. Their accounts of dealing with Libby and other members of the administration constitute an encyclopedia of insiderdom—the anonymous-source-concealment dance, the sometimes transparent charade of selective source protection, the willingness to be spun in exchange for access to power.[61]

Notable assessments of Waas's journalismEdit

On October 27, 1992, the late David Shaw, then a staff writer for The Los Angeles Times who won a Pulitzer Prize for Criticism the previous year, assessed the reporting by his colleagues Murray Waas and Douglas Frantz on the first Bush administration's prewar policy towards Iraq leading up to the first Gulf War, which included "more than 100 stories, totaling more than 90,000 words": "The Times's stories—many based on previously secret papers prepared by the Bush administration—alleged that the Bush administration tried to cover up what it had done by altering documents it supplied to Congress and by attempting to obstruct official investigations of aid to Iraq," quoting the observation of Leonard Downie, executive editor of The Washington Post, that his own newspaper was "slow in getting up to speed on that story, in part because it's the kind of story involving careful work with documents... Once you're behind, it takes a while to catch up." Downie credits the Los Angeles Times with "pav[ing] the way," saying that that is "why we began pursuing it after really not noticing it from the outset."[62]

In June 1998, J.D. Lasica published "The Web: A New Channel for Investigative Journalism", a "sidebar" to his article entitled "Salon: The Best Pure-Play Web Publication?", published in American Journalism Review, assessing reporting on the Impeachment of Bill Clinton in by Waas and his colleagues, observing that "Salon's coverage of the Clinton-Lewinsky matter—its first sustained foray into classic investigative journalism—has served as a counterweight to the mainstream media's wolfpack mindset" and citing the view of Andrew Ross (then-managing editor of Salon); according to Lasica, "Salon's investigative journalism ... has raised old media's hackles because, Ross says, it was done the old-fashioned way: shoe leather, cultivating sources, working the phones—no new-media tricks here." Indeed, Lasica continues the 1998 account, by pointing out that Waas, who has written a dozen stories for Salon, is [at that time] a bit of a technophobe; he never signs onto the Web and has never seen his stories online. He writes for Salon, he says, because 'I like the daily rhythm and the immediacy.'"[63]

Waas's reporting on the administration of George W. Bush, especially with regard to the Plame affair, has been called "groundbreaking" by New York University journalism Professor Jay Rosen, who considers Waas the "new Bob Woodward": "By Woodward Now," Rosen writes of Waas, "I mean the reporter who is actually doing what Woodward has a reputation for doing: finding, tracking, breaking into reportable parts—and then publishing—the biggest story in town."[64]

In the Summer of 2006, writing in Nieman Reports, Jim Boyd, former deputy editorial page editor of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune for twenty-four years, prepared an "exclusive list" of newspaper reporters whom he considered "courageous," including among them Murray Waas: "People I consider courageous are Murray Waas at the National Journal; Dan Froomkin at and; Warren Strobel and several of his colleagues at the Knight Ridder Washington bureau (soon to be the McClatchy Washington bureau); Walter Pincus and Dana Priest of the [Washington] Post. And, of course, Helen Thomas."[65]

GQ Magazine wrote in 2008 naming Waas as one of four of "The Best Reporters You Don't Know About,":

Years of groundbreaking watchdog journalism have resulted in this nickname: the new Bob Woodward. His pieces on the Plame leaks and U.S. attorney firings inadvertently provided candidates with more ammunition against the current administration than any campaign strategist could hope for.

Eric Alterman and Danielle Ivory wrote in an essay for the Center for American Progress on May 21, 2009:

[T]raditional media outlets are increasingly (and to their credit) taking cues from the reporters and commentators that populate the blogosphere. And contrary to popular mythology, not everyone in the mainstream media has been loath to admit this.
This symbiosis has been a long time coming. But it’s increasingly evident every day as Internet-based reporters are increasingly setting priorities for the national news agenda. Greg Sargent, then at the American Prospect, lauded Murray Waas , an independent web reporter, for unearthing the truth about the outing of Valerie Plame and prodding the mainstream media onward in 2006. Jay Rosen crowned Waas the “Woodward of now,crowned Waas the “Woodward of now,” explaining that the actual “Woodward of now,” Bob Woodward, had somehow missed the story.

Investigation of the Health Insurance IndustryEdit

On the eve of the historic heatlh reform vote in Congress, on March, 17, 2010, Reuters published a story by Murray Waas, detailing how one of the naiton's largest insurance companies, Assurant, had a "company policy of targeting policyholders with HIV" for cancelation of their policies once they were diagnosed. The story asserted: "A computer program and algorithm targeted every policyholder recently diagnosed with HIV for an automatic fraud investigation, as the company searched for any pretext to revoke their policy... [T]heir insurance policies often were canceled on erroneous information, the flimsiest of evidence, or for no good reason at all."[66]

The Obama administration and members of Congress cited the report as a reason health care reform was needed. In a column appearing only a few nights before the vote, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman wrote about Waas' story,first in his blog, and then in his column, thst the actions of Assurant were represenative of the "vileness of our current system" and illustrated why reform was necessary."[67]

After passage of the health reform bill, Reuters followed up, withanother story by Waas on April 23, 2010 disclosing that WellPoint, the nation's largest health insurance company, had similarly targeted policyholders with breast cancer, shortly after their diagnoses."[68][69] The Reuters story asserted that WellPoint utilized "a computer algorithm that automatically targeted... every other policyholder recently diagnosed with breast cancer. The software triggered an immediate fraud investigation, as the company searched for some pretext to drop their policies."[70][71]

An earlier investigation by the House Energy and Commerce Committee had determined that WellPoint, Assurant, and a thrid company, UnitedHealth Group Inc., had made at least $300 million by improperly rescinding more than 19,000 policyholders over one five-year period.."[72][73]

The Waas story garnered immediate attention. Published not only on Reuters' website, one of the nation's most highly trafficked news sites, it also appeared on seven of the ten most highly read news sites-- those of the New York Times, the Washington Post, Yahoo News, ABC News, MSNBC, and the Huffington Post.

On April 23, 2010, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius wrote Wellpoint's CEO, Angela Braly, to say that Wellpoint's actions were "deplorable" and "uncinscionable," and called on the company to "immediately cease these practices."[74][75]

President Obama, whose late mother had problems with her own insurance carrier before she passed away from breast cancer, followed up on May 8, 2010, by severely criticizing WellPoint for the practice in his weekly radio address.[76][77][78]

As a result of the intense pressure from the Obama administration, WellPoint agreed to voluntarily end such practices.[79] The nation's other largest health insurance companies only days later followed suit.[80]

Praising the reform, the New York Times editorial page said in a May 2, 2010 editorial: {C Americans are already starting to see the benefits of health care reform... In recent days insurers and their trade association have rushed to announce that they will end rescissions immediately... {C The insurers decided to act quickly after they were whacked by some very bad publicity. An investigative report by Reuters said that one of the nation’s biggest insurers, WellPoint, was targeting women with breast cancer for fraud investigations that could lead to rescissions.[81]

Later writing in Slate on May 10, 2006, about WellPoint's conduct, and the impact of Waas' stories:

No corporation can claim a more vital role in passing and starting to implement the health care reform law than WellPoint, which has a larger customer base (34 million) than any other health insurer in the United States. This is not to say that WellPoint supported health reform; quite the opposite. But as President Obama's May 8 radio address demonstrated not for the first time (text, audio), WellPoint is a uniquely maladroit corporate heavy. If it didn't exist, Obama might have had to invent it.
"[W]hen we found out that an insurance company was systematically dropping the coverage of women diagnosed with breast cancer," Obama said in the address, "my administration called on them to end this practice immediately." The company went unnamed, but it was WellPoint, and news of the practice was broken by Reuters in an April 22 news story by Murray Waas, an investigative reporter who also happens to be a cancer survivor.
Waas reported that WellPoint "was using a computer algorithm that automatically targeted … every … policyholder recently diagnosed with breast cancer. The software triggered an immediate fraud investigation, as the company searched for some pretext to drop their policies, according to government regulators and investigators."
This prompted Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to write WellPoint chief executive Angela Braly and pronounce herself "surprised and disappointed." This practice, Sebelius wrote, was "deplorable." Braly replied that it was she who was "disappointed" that both Sebelius and Waas would "grossly misrepresent" the policies of a corporate citizen in whose Indianapolis headquarters hung "a three-story pink ribbon." Braly referred Sebelius to a fact sheet stating that the computer software in question "is used to look at a series of diagnostic codes meant to capture conditions that applicants would likely have known about at the time they applied for coverage. We do not single out breast cancer or pregnancy."
In other words, WellPoint had a computer program able to identify multiple diseases it found especially conducive to rescission (the routine and disgraceful practice by which health insurers comb through the paperwork of seriously ill policyholders in search of some chicken-shit reason to nullify the policy). Why Braly thought this assertion might improve her company's image is hard to guess. When the smoke cleared, WellPoint had been maneuvered into volunteering to end such rescissions as of May 1... United Healthcare quickly followed suit.

Waas later won the Bartlett & Steele Award for Business Investigative Reporting from the Walter Cronkite School at Arizona State University for his stories on WellPoint and other health insurance companies.

Explaining its decision to honor Waas with their award, the Barllett & Steele judges said in its citation:

[contrasted the upfront public stance] of a health care company and its CEO to the reality behind the scenes, revealing the insidiousness of gatekeeping by software,” said the judges. “This investigation led to government pressure and an industrywide change in the practice of dropping health care coverage for patients after they became sick.”

Waas also won a second award by the Society of American Business Editors and Writers (SABEW) in the category of investigative reporting for reporting the same stories.[82][83]

See alsoEdit


  1. ^ Facebook page as of 2009-07-13
  2. ^ a b c d Matt Welch, "Salon's Coverage Commands Respect for Net Journalists", Online Journalism Review (Annenberg School for Communication at USC), March 30, 1998, accessed August 26, 2007. , March 30, 1998, accessed June 20, 2007.
  3. ^ a b Press release, Sterling Publishing, March 6, 2007, "Press Room": US_v_ILewisLibby_Release.doc (Downloadable document file); cf. catalogue description; both accessed June 21, 2007. [Note: The downloadable press release file is misnamed; it is not a ".pdf" file; it is a ".doc" file.]
  4. ^ For related information, see Murray Waas, "A Book", Whatever Already! (blog), March 6, 2007 and "Book Party", Whatever Already! (blog), June 20, 2007; both accessed June 21, 2007.
  5. ^ a b c d Liz Halloran, "A Muckraker's Day in the Sun", interview with Murray Waas, U.S. News and World Report 15 May 2006, accessed 29 April 2007.
  6. ^ a b c d Howard Kurtz, "Writer Sat on His Own Life-and-Death Story,"The Washington Post, June 25, 2006, C-01, accessed June 21, 2007.
  7. ^ a b c Murray Waas, "The Wag Time Pet Spa Conspiracy ... And a Cancer Survivor's Right to Respect", The Huffington Post (personal blog), December 21, 2006, accessed June 21, 2007; contains hyperlink to Kurtz's article and his own related blog entries.
  8. ^
  9. ^
  10. ^
  11. ^
  12. ^
  13. ^
  14. ^
  15. ^
  16. ^
  17. ^
  18. ^
  19. ^
  20. ^
  21. ^ Murray Waas, "Jack Anderson: An Appreciation: The Muckraking Outsider Never Gave a Damn about Entree", The Village Voice, December 19, 2005, accessed August 16, 2007.
  22. ^
  23. ^
  24. ^
  25. ^
  26. ^
  27. ^ Alicia Patterson Journalism Fellowship
  28. ^
  29. ^
  30. ^
  31. ^
  32. ^
  33. ^
  34. ^
  35. ^
  36. ^
  37. ^
  38. ^
  39. ^
  40. ^
  41. ^
  42. ^
  43. ^
  44. ^
  45. ^
  46. ^
  47. ^
  48. ^
  49. ^
  50. ^
  51. ^ Murray Waas, "The Elephant in Wilson's Living Room: Feds Broaden Leak Probe, Start Grilling Republican Party Officials", The Village Voice, October 29 - November 4, 2003, accessed August 18, 2007.
  52. ^ Amy Goodman, "Ex-Cheney Chief of Staff Lewis 'Scooter' Libby Convicted of Perjury, Obstruction in CIA Leak Trial", interview with Murray Waas and Marcy Wheeler, Democracy Now!, March 7, 2007, accessed June 20, 2007.
  53. ^
  54. ^
  55. ^
  56. ^
  57. ^
  58. ^
  59. ^
  60. ^
  61. ^
  62. ^ David Shaw, "Iraqgate—A Case Study of a Big Story With Little Impact: Despite Hundreds of News Reports, No Public Outrage Has Erupted Over Secret U.S. Aid to Iraq", The Los Angeles Times, October 27, 1992, accessed August 17, 2007.
  63. ^ J.D. Lasica, "The Web: A New Channel for Investigative Journalism: Salon's Groundbreaking Stories on the Ken Starr Investigation Challenge the Conventional Wisdom Laid Down by the Mainstream Media's Wolfpack Mindset", American Journalism Review, June 1998, sidebar to "Salon: The Best Pure-Play Web Publication? Salon's Savvy Blend of New and Old Media Has Made It a Pacesetter for Online Journalism. It May Also Be a Harbinger of Journalism's Future on the Internet", American Journalism Review, June 1998, accessed August 17, 2007.
  64. ^ Jay Rosen, "Murray Waas Is Our Woodward Now", PressThink (blog), April 9, 2006, accessed June 21, 2007
  65. ^ Jim Boyd, "Editorial Pages: Why Courage Is Hard to Find", Niemann Reports (Nieman Foundation for Journalism of Harvard University), Summer 2006 ("Reflections on Courage: United States"), accessed August 19, 2007.
  66. ^
  67. ^ Paul Krugman, "Why We Must Reform,"[The New York Times], March 19, 2010, accessed April 25, 2011.
  68. ^
  69. ^
  70. ^
  71. ^
  72. ^
  73. ^
  74. ^
  75. ^
  76. ^
  77. ^
  78. ^
  79. ^
  80. ^
  81. ^
  82. ^
  83. ^


Pertinent selected articles and books by Murray Waas
Pertinent selected articles about and interviews of Waas

[edit] External linksEdit