Not buying it

Mike Isikoff's book generated some buzz this week. In my line of work, I watch and measure buzz, both in the aggregate and by individual pieces of buzz. Using the same methods of observation and measurement, the fallout after Isikoff's book tells me one thing:

THEY want us to believe it's Armitage that was the source of the Plame leak.

And BADLY.

This morning there were (82) stories published across the internet on this subject, in both traditional media and internet-only outlets. More than half of the stories were "reverb" -- repeats of the same story published by a single source (i.e., AP or Reuters or other outlet).

More importantly, outlets directly connected to the Republican Party were pushing the perspective that the Plame Affair was over and that Armitage was the source; each of them carried the same story line, each of them with a slightly different windup, but ultimately the same conclusion. Their content has been picked up and now reverberates across the internet in different outlets, ones that typically mirror right-wing talking points.

I'm not buying it. There are too many holes yet. There are far too many reasons why parties implicated or involved in l'affaire du Plame would seek to throw Armitage on his sword, not the least of which is their partisanship. Frankly, the amount of buzz across the internet also tells me that the general public isn't buying it, either; if they were, the buzz would be more than three-fold on the publication of this "news" by Isikoff.

I'll wait until I see more conclusive evidence, or until the grand jury assigned to l'affaire du Plame is finished or excused.

Oh, there is one more thing this situation and its buzz tells me:

THEY know there's a BIGGER fish on the line -- THEY are redirecting your attention elsewhere, as they so often do.