Setting the Record Straight - [FR v. The NY Times, Or How NOT To Do Activism]

New York Times ^ | March 14, 2004 | Daniel Okrent

[philetus]

But pissing them off won't help either


Sure it will.

You piss on someone long enough, they will get out of the way.

[philetus]

I thought he told you to send the facts and they would look into it.

I guess he didn't mean they would actually print it.

[stands2reason]

The poster responded that this is FreeRepublic and he/she didn't need to post a link or otherwise prove his/her statement.

What kind of idiot writes that? A newbie, apparently. The rule is, you back up your statements with links. And THAT is Free Republic.

[doug from upland]

I now know who you are. No wonder you didn't want to call me and talk last week when I FReepmailed you my phone number.

It doesn't matter what others have told me that you have said about me on other sites. On this one, we are allies. After Kerry is sunk, I will be glad to either have a duel with you in the streets or share a beer. Your choice.

[doug from upland]

Apparently they are not interested in the rest of the story.

[Tall_Texan]

But it's always useful to read it first.

Only if you plan on giving feedback. Otherwise, I wouldn't touch the Times.

I agree with Okrent that you ought to read first what you attack but it's not good for my blood pressure to read the Times or any other leftist newspaper on a regular basis. If something's brought to my attention, I am obligated to read the original before responding directly to them.

[Hon]

"I now know who you are. No wonder you didn't want to call me and talk last week when I FReepmailed you my phone number."

I didn't want to call you because I didn't want you interjecting yourself into the current Kerry/VVAW story anymore than you already have.

I appreciate your interest in the story, and your fanning interest in it. But you seem to be determined to go beyond that.

Many here have already gotten the impression that it is somehow the product of your efforts. It isn't in any way shape or form. You need to remember that yourself.

[doug from upland]

I didn't want to call you because I didn't want you interjecting yourself into the current Kerry/VVAW story anymore than you already have.
============================================

Had you called, you could have shared with me the roadmap, and I would have made sure I didn't get in the way. You chose not to do that.

As for credit, my ego doesn't need it. I hereby let all FReepers know that this is the work product of Hon. Give him the credit for his hard work. My interest is keeping the RATS out of the White House.

There is no need to fight. Let FReepers know where you need help getting this out. Hey, if you sink Kerry, I'll even write a song a about you.

[WOSG]

"Daniel called me a few days ago to give me a heads up about the story. I gave him permission to use my last name when he asked, but I guess he decided not to."

Would that name be "von Upland" ? :-)

This is IMHO quite funny. No outrage that their byline is used to run an article with materials from others, but outrage that readers would assume that a byline means authorship.

They are playing 'gotcha' journalism in complaining about the tenor of the calls; there is no one to verify or contradict their version of how polite people were. So they can tar freerepublic.com at will.

"Unfortunately, although we really made them angry with our phone calls, I don't believe they have done a story on the media setup and phony outrage."

Please understand folks, the fact that you exist and think conservative thoughts is what makes them angry. They wont run any story on the phony media setup because they were PART OF IT.

Anyway, your stunt got media play, which is pretty good for a freep.

[WOSG]

So this guy is not an ombudsman for the readers, he's the CYA shield for the paper.

"It looks like yet again, the liberal bias at the Times is the proverbial elephant in the room, and is being ignored in print. Okrent could have addressed it in the column posted above, but instead he complained about readers' calling reporters."

[WOSG]

Kerry's biggest fear indeed ... America is:

Not Fonda Kerry

[WOSG]

he he he.

That's why I dont think there is such a thing as bad publicity for freeRepublic in the NYTimes. They call Freepers rude right-wing extremists, and every conservative reading that article will perk up ... "huh?!?! who? What? where?" ... :-)

[Blood of Tyrants]

So the NY Slimes can simply repeat trash stories and have no responsibilty for it's content?

What is the difference between creating a lie and repeating a lie?

[Hon]

You're confused.

[Homer1]

and in conclusion

We at The Times LIED about who wrote the story, but it's YOUR problem. Right.

[Bob J]

Are you Mojo?

[weegee]

What was DfU supposed to do? Ask the writers to confess to writing this before posting to FR?

The Australian paper should have been taken to task. This is the second anti-FR article that I am aware of in The Old Grey Lady (tis a pity she's a whore) in a week.

The other one (regarding the Photoshopping of John Kerry) didn't even bother to mention FR.

This is bellyaching. Cheese and whine (not you Hon, the NYT).

[Saundra Duffy]

You rascal you. YAHOO!!

[weegee]

Revived Media Schadenfreude ping - New York Times bashing the Free Republic again...

On, Off, or grab it for a Media Shenanigans/Schadenfreude ping

[ladyinred]

So, NY TIMES, when will you write the complete story and show us that you are not really a house organ of the Democratic Party? May I quote Adlai Stevenson from October, 1962? "I am prepared to wait for my answer until hell freezes over."

A waiting to shiver BTTT!