A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Press Pool

Fame, fortune, and a pseudonym.

There is a weird tale unfolding between writers for both The Daily Caller and Mediaite, a tale of two egos, it appears and Fishbowl DC has been covering the blow by blow. The incident’s genesis was when Mediaite’s White House correspondent, Tommy Christopher, calling the Daily Caller’s correspondent, John Pool,  a “homophobic piece of shit.” While the comment against Mr. Pool has merit judging from Pool’s past remarks, John is not taking the comment lightly.

Both reporters are now doing their best to destroy each other and perhaps tarnishing their own reputations in the process. Both accuse each other of habitually brown nosing their way up the journalistic ladder in hopes of one day joining the Punditcracy. Interviews have since been published and the beltway crowd is ablaze at the reality TV quality entertainment unfolding right before their eyes.

Now John Pool has tossed down a gauntlet of sorts. Apparently Tommy Christopher is not really Tommy Christopher; Mediaite’s reporter has been using a pseudonym.  Pool is now embarking on a campaign through a series of articles to expose Mr. Christopher’s orthonym and perhaps exposing a few skeletons in the process.

Yet this raises a question to the blogosphere. Mr. Christopher started out as a blogger, where he assumed his pen name but, is there a point when a blogger rises to such public stature through journalistic endeavors in the real world that a pseudonym becomes inappropriate? Mr. Christopher has built a brand in his assumed name and Mediaite is not a traditional media outlet. But, there is a certain power in a knowing someone’s or something’s true name. What do you think, or do you even care about the name behind the story if the story is accurate?

Myself, I will continue to watch the drama unfold on Fishbowl DC, a blog that always lives up to its name through the window into the petty insanity that is our country’s seat of power it offers.

(Sources: Fishbowl DC, The Daily Caller)


  1. F says

    Generally, you stick with your brand name. I suppose that if you begin to appear more as a public figure in person, you might want to identify your given name, but why not continue using the brand name?

    robb, that’s funny.

  2. says

    Off hand I can’t think of many reasons it would matter much. Conflicts of interest come to mind, though, or something deceptive like that. Like if you’re portraying yourself as an independent political analyst, but actually working for the White House or a senator and basically doing propaganda.

    Maybe it’s just suspicion but I would tend to want to know who the bloggers really are. However I’m quite aware of many good reasons to use a pseudonym that are more compelling.

  3. jamessweet says

    I agree with F. There probably comes a point where one ought to make their given name public, but you’d still go by the ‘nym most likely. And when that point comes is pretty subjective…


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *