Dirt.

Or, as Newsweek diplomatically puts it, "Secrets of the 2008 Campaign," aka all the dirt reporters were honor-bound to conceal until after the election. Back when we were hearing about Gov. Sarah Palin's alleged issues (more on that later), I was kind of miffed at the whole "secret" thing...when what you as a reporter see or hear of a candidate directly contradicts what that candidate is saying out on the trail, I think you kind of have an obligation to let people know while they can still do something about it. But most of what's in this gripping seven-part loooooong read is pretty tame, falling into the "interesting, but not exculpatory" category.

For instance...Sen. Hillary Clinton was more ambivalent about running than the caricatures of her would have us believe. So was Sen. Obama. McCain's campaign was even more dysfunctional than it appeared. Cindy McCain still hates Karl Rove (putting her a little higher on my "people I want to have a beer with" list).

Now, about the Palin drama...in an earlier post, I was a little dubious about the much-reported claims that she didn't know if Africa were a country or a continent, among other things. Well, it turns out that the Africa tidbit came from a "McCain aid" who's not actually a real person. I have to say, it scares the hell out of me that so many news outlets could be taken in by a hoax. It's an indictment of the way business is conducted in the world of the 24-hour news cycle, where the emphasis on how quickly a reporter can deliver the meat, and not necessarily on how well-cooked it is.

It's also telling that the first MSM outlet to report "Eisenstadt"'s claim was good ol' Fox News. It's nice to see that their sloppiness extends to conservative political figures on occasion. When Melissa at Shakesville first wrote about the segment where Fox's Carl Cameron gleefully threw Palin under the bus (hint: when Bill O'Reilly is the moderate voice of reason in your discussion, you should probably consider drawing back), I honestly thought she was laying it on a little thick. After all, it's not "sexist" to report facts, is it? But when those facts turn out not to be facts, one has to ask - why did Cameron rush to the air with a completely unsubstantiated (because the source is fake) story? Is it that old media disease, "must get the story out first"? Or is it that he didn't care because the rumor fit a prevailing conservative narrative that women just aren't equipped to handle governing? It's troubling on many levels.

So on one hand, we've got a meticulously reported behind-the-scenes account of the 2008 presidential race that I want to keep for my great-grandchildren, and on the other, a sad example of why so many of us are so wary of trusting the mainstream media. Sigh.