Posted on 05/18/2009 3:30:39 AM PDT by Scanian
Acknowledging what the blogosphere has known for weeks, the New York Times finally went on record to admit that just before last Election Day it killed a politically sensitive news story involving corruption allegations that might have made the Obama campaign look bad.
But the admission on Sunday, which came seven months after NYT staff reporter Stephanie Strom's reporting about possibly illegal coordination between the Obama campaign and ACORN last year, took the form of a snarky column from Clark Hoyt, the Old Gray Lady's "public editor." Hoyt used the word "nonsense" to describe the allegations of impropriety leveled against ACORN and the Obama campaign.
Hoyt writes in the Sunday New York Times
On March 17, a Republican lawyer, quoting a confidential source for a Times reporter, testified to Congress that the newspaper killed a story last fall because it would have been "a game-changer" in the presidential election.
The charge, amplified by Bill O'Reilly on Fox News in April and reverberating around the conservative blogosphere, is about the most damning allegation that can be made against a news organization. If true, it would mean that Times editors, whose job is to report the facts without fear or favor, were so lacking in integrity that they withheld an important story in order to influence the election.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
So does this mean they’re going to cover the continuing ACORN fraud like the 200+ ACORN connected agencies that supposedly exist at the adress of a New Orleans funeral home?
Which BTW brings up the issue of evaporating Katrina funding and what did William Jefferson know and when did he know it.
The charge, amplified by Bill O’Reilly on Fox News in April and reverberating around the conservative blogosphere, is about the most damning allegation that can be made against a news organization. If true, it would mean that Times editors, whose job is to report the facts without fear or favor, were so lacking in integrity that they withheld an important story in order to influence the election.
Nooooo! Say it ain’t so. I’m shocked.
The NYT and their peers cannot die fast enough.
Does this explain why the top two demographics of NY Times readers are parrots and puppies?
..the defenseless action will be defended tooth and nail, and the outcome will be an apology...in other words, yeah we're sorry, but so what?
BTTT
Thanks.
“The New York Times is a building rock climbers practice on.” ~~ (I forgot who it was that said it)
William Jefferson knew to keep 92 grand in da freezer plan didn’t go well.
Shut the doors of the NYT. There should be a permanent protest going on in front of their building
I'm not surprised by this, and neither should anyone, although I'm sure that if some newspaper somewhere had spiked a story during the election that would've made McCain look bad, the NYT would be all over it.
Partisan news organizations do not bother me except when they pretend to be non-partisan.
The NYT and their peers cannot die fast enough.
Agreed. Kinda reminds me of the federal case against a noted Alaskan Senator that just vanished AFTER the damage was done. The election, if you can call it that, in Minnesota, is another example, as well as ACORN getting a pass on voter registration. Hell, the fact that you and I are funding our own destruction through them and a thousand other NGO’s that receive federal funding, should get someones attention in Congress, and indeed it does as the funding continues along with our destruction.
Who, what, where, when, and how.
For instance, who cut a million dollar check to keep Wade Rathke from going to prison for embezzling a million dollars from ACORN?
Its not that hard. A reporter doesn’t need to provide answers, just ask the questions.
“in other words, yeah we’re sorry, but so what?”
I doubt the word ‘sorry’ will be uttered ... I expect very little to be printed about this and any response from the NYT will sound like “Yeah we did and it worked. And there is not a damn thing you can do about it.”
For instance, who cut a million dollar check to keep Wade Rathke from going to prison for embezzling a million dollars from ACORN?
His Brother? Just guessing here.
And to this day, the NY Slimes REFUSES to condemn the writings of Durante, and refuse to "give back" the Pulitzer Prize, even after all the evidence proving what a scumbag Durante was has come to light.
The Times was then, and is now, complicit in the coverup of the murder of some 50 million people.
Mark
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.