You might remember Jesse Washington: He's the Associated Press editor who last year issued an ill-conceived ban on Paris Hilton news that, after much to-do, was lifted in less than two weeks. Within a year, the AP went entirely in the other direction, telling staffers "everything involving [celebrity] Britney [Spears] is a big deal," a reversal Washington awkwardly, and overenthusiastically, joined, again making waves with the announcement that the wire had already written Spears' obituary amid the singer's psychiatric breakdowns. He also rather rashly said in a video interview that "if you want to know that it really happened [in celebrity news], then you're going to have to go to AP... If we put it out, you can bet the house on it that it really happened." That hyperbolic claim was undermined a few months later, when a source claimed "the AP misquoted me" as saying actor Paul Newman had cancer. Having displayed such a nuanced touch, what might Washington's future be at the wire service? Why, covering the sensitive topic of race and ethnicity! In fact, Washington beat out 448 other applicants for the position of national writer on such matters, according to an AP staff memo from U.S. News Managing Editor Mike Oreskes:

Okay, we've had just about enough of AP entertainment editor Jesse Washington, who guarantees in the above video to give you "good bang for your buck" if you pass on exclusive information to the wire service. You remember Washington, right? "If Britney passed away, it’s easily one of the biggest stories in a long time," he told US when explaining why the AP had Britney Spears' obit ready. "If we wait an hour to have a really good obituary for someone like Heath Ledger, we're totally out of the game. And that’s not a place that I ever want to be," he said on NPR this weekend. We've got no problem with the AP canning Britney's obit (we wouldn't want them to be caught off guard like they were with Ledger's.) But this guy could use a handler. Or a muzzle, maybe? It's one thing to respond to press queries with a comment offering explanation. But Washington's remarks are a tetch tone-deaf. Or are they?