Posted on 01/04/2006 5:35:40 PM PST by pissant
Media: The New York Times is under fire from the left and right over the handling of its wiretapping story. But that's just the latest in a pattern of embarrassing mistakes and misdeeds by the "paper of record."
It's been all the blues that's fit to print for The New York Times reporters, editors and brass lately. The memory of the Jayson Blair plagiarism scandal was just fading when veteran Washington reporter Judith Miller was jailed for 85 days for protecting a source — then promptly shown the door amid suggestions of receiving more than leaks from her contacts.
It might have helped if Miller weren't resented by others at the Times for lacking a liberal political agenda.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
FGS, could someone please have mercy on us all and pull the plug at the NYT? A true mercy killing I could support.
Indeed. Let some other, more reputable publication take over it's facilities....like the Weekly World News
You have to ask yourself, who would be stupid enough to advertize in the Times these days?
Especially after they've been caught lying about their circulation.
Will Shortz (the replacement for the real genius, Eugene Maleska) has the best daily crossword puzzle in the country. I do it everyday and it is holding my alzheimers at bay...IIRC (huh?).
I will admit it has a fine crossword puzzle, in addition to a nice style section. LOL
Since when does being unprofitable mean failure for liberal media. NPR, Air-Head America, LA Times, Boston Globe, Providence Journal, et al, ad nauseum. Making money? Who cares!
That might happen after James Risen let the cat out of the bag on Katie Couric's little show the other day. His statements were more profoundly revealing than most have recognized. After listening to his defense of the leakers and his explanation of the "concerns" of the "Whistleblowers", it is clear that the motives of these individuals was policy differences not civil liberty concerns. In oher words...it's all about politics.
Risen's statements about the concerns of the bureaucrats and careerists within the executive branch pointedly betray the argument he makes; that their motives were pure. Bullshit! He revealed that his sources were responding to an administration that had the temerity to actually make policy decisions that they did not agree with.
Here is how Risen described the motives of the leakers;
"the checks and balances that normally keep American foreign policy and national security policy toward the center kind of broke down. You had more of a
radicalization, in which the career professionals were not really given a chance to forge a consensus within the administration. The principals: Rumsfeld, Cheney Tenet and Rice were meeting constantly, setting policy and never allowing the experts, the people who understand the region to have a say."
This statement by Risen indicates many things, among them that the career professionals with the executive branches, such as the Justice and State Departments, thought it was they, not the elected President of The United States, that should be deciding course and policy decisions within the Government.
Policy had been "radicalized", they were not allowed to "forge a consensus", "The principals: Rumsfeld, Cheney Tenet and Rice were meeting constantly", "never allowing the experts" to have a say. My God, imagine that, the highest elected officials in our government actually deciding a course that differed from those career leftwing bureaucrats who forged the failed policies that got us in this mess in the first place.
Risen has made a stupendously stupid admission and revealed the true motives of the "Whistleblowers". Their motives were borne of hubris and politics, not the law, and certainly not your civil liberties. They are in deep trouble and they should be.
Freegards,
PresidentFelon
"I will admit it has a fine crossword puzzle, in addition to a nice style section. LOL"
Hmmmm...the Times xword puzzle...
"11 letter word for evil company" Halliburton
"7 letter word that best describes Republicans" Corrupt
Yes, he does. I use substitutes now, but it is not the same :(
I read Risen's pathetic interview. I think a nice tight noose is too good for the bottomfeeder.
That would be TOO easy for most of their readers.
That is a great analysis/explanation, PresidentFelon.
Paper of record? More like paper of wreckage.
Unfit for TP, in my estimation.
Do you subscribe, or do you root through the garbage for this rag? I, for one wouldn't even root through a garbage can for this piece of trash. :)
Oooops...thanks Jim. And keep those Freepathon smackers flowing fellow Freepers.
And no...Jim didn't tell me to say that.
LOL. I like that. Though I would have the classifieds face up, don't want to damage your parrot's brain.
TU, LOL. But I agree.
I tried the NYT for lining my bird's cage, and it up an died on me.
Overexposure to liberals was the vet's estimate of what happened.
Isn't a Tarpon a salmonoid found in Eastern Russia?
I agree. I hadn't heard any of that before. Thanks for the illuminating analysis.
Crab Wrapper
LOL! Your a piece of work! :)
Very good observations and assessment. Thanks for sharing it.
Damn, I need you on my BBQ, not posting to my threads. LOL
Long overdue, I might add.
Oh, the old gray mare,
She ain't what she used to be,
Ain't what she used to be,
Oh, the old gray mare,
She ain't what she used to be,
Many long years ago
Many long years ago.
Actually, she's the same old hag but she's losing her ability shovel the BS on the masses and get away with it.
That's the best I've seen Pinchy Sulzberger look in ages.
It hasn't changed it stripes since it took the side of the USSR in the cold war.
Amen to that. And we can thank Rush for demonstrating how powerful the MSM alternative can be.
You have to ask yourself, who would be stupid enough to advertize in the Times these days?
Maybe truth in advertising doesn't apply to the NYT.
One of my favorite expressions (reserved for special people). As an artist and struggling writer...thx
Not much time to take this one apart properly, but New York Times' Adam Cohen today holds bloggers up to ethical standards which, he argues, ought to equal the high...
Not much time to take this one apart properly, but New York Times' Adam Cohen today holds bloggers up to ethical standards which, he argues, ought to equal the high standards of those in the MSM.
While we agree with much of his thesis in general, one wonders if he ought to be throwing such stones from inside the Times' own fragile glass house.
This finger-wagging quote -- "Information should be verified before it is printed" -- amongst others, strikes one as more than just a tad ironic coming from the paper who allowed buckets of front page ink for Judith Miller to post un-verified information which helped march the world directly into a (so far) endless war.
Ms. Miller still works at -- and presumably collects a handsome salary from -- New York Times in the bargain. As she doesn't seem to have been held up to any particular set of ethics in the bargain, wouldn't Cohen's criticism be better directed homeward right about now?
Blogs, it seems, in Cohen's article are all tossed into the same ethically-challenged, non-journalistic barrel. All of us, apparently, require an "ethical upgrade" in Cohen's condescending opinion. True, we suppose, in as much as it would be appropriate for us to criticize the Times themselves for "reporting" done by super-market tabloids such as Weekly World News.
By way of example, here's just one graf from Cohen's piece:
The left, whether blogging or MSM, peddles nothing but defeatism and anti-americanism. They are losing, they know it, and they are getting hysterical. Quite a spectacle, I might add.
If CBSNBCABC had ANY brains, they would hire a center right anchor and editor and mop the floor against the other two rivals.
AH, but the people who run those alphabets are democrats -- therefore, they have no brain. We will see CBS hire a new anchor just as leftist and biased as those on the other alphabets. There is no hope for old media....they do not understand that we want truth not democrat spin. Plus, if they go straight, they will lose their bonuses from Soros, et al.
The NYT is no longer the paper of record, and we haven't needed one for more than a decade.
Good, I'd just as soon see them continue to shrivel anyhow.
They are legends only in their own minds.
What do you call 500 less New York Times employees?
...................A good Start!!!
NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 20, 2005--The New York Times Company announced today that it plans to undertake staff reductions that will affect approximately 500 employees, about four percent of its total workforce. It plans to begin the staff reductions in October and implement them over the course of the next six to nine months.
It would be a VERY tough choice if I had to choose between a 747 full of lawyers or a 747 full of NYTimes employees running out of fuel over the Atlantic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.