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

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

[Betaille]

This is all such a load of crap. You made a mistake, it was an honest one. If the New York Times wants to see reckless dishonesty, how about the fact that they buried their own poll... just because it showed bush winning!
We should all be more careful in the future since such mistakes dilute our legitimate argument that the NYtimes is horribly biased and sometimes outright dishonest. However, this guy is very much a part of the media bias problem and nobody here needs to apologize to him.

[mrustow]

This is not good.

I beg to differ. This is VERY good. You know how many letters to the editor I've sent to the Times, pointing out their bias and misrepresentations, just over the past year? How many do you think they published?

There are only two ways the Times will deal with FR: by ignoring us, or by seeking to discredit us. When the Times ignores a critic, it is because its editors feel they can get away with it. If they seek to discredit it, it is because they are resigned that that critic is now part of the political landscape, and will now seek to positively ruin him. But with rare exceptions, the only way you ruin a political critic, is if you can kill him off with silence. Now that the Times has attacked us, and spelled our name correctly, its readers can check out FR, and get our side of the story.