Posted on 07/20/2004 2:46:05 PM PDT by Republican Red
Dear (Republican Red);
I can understand your reaction. The Berger story was badly underplayed, but not out of any evil intent. The news broke very late last night, and editors rushed just a few paragraphs into the paper -- all they had at the time.
I can assure you that we will be following this news much more fully in tomorrow's paper and thereafter.
Thanks for writing, and for holding us to a high standard.
Best, Bill Borders, senior editor, The New York Times.
It was good that he replied. Tell him you will hold him to his word and send the email to Bill O'Reilly and FoxNews with a letter explaining its relevance, asking them to hold the NYTimes to account for their reporting on this story.
Do you not think that the revelation of Clinton Administration National Security adviser Sandy Berger taking classified memoes and documents in his pants and SOCKS deserves a little more coverage than seven paragraphs of AP wire copy on page SIXTEEN of your rotten biased paper?
And you scratch your heads and wonder why your circulation is dwindling? You are so blatantly biased to the loony left you are disgusting...a pox on you.
The story broke around 8PM EST. I first heard it on Michael Savage's program, around 8:10. Michael Savage quoted the AP report and he had much more information than the NY Times printed, including the part in which Berger says some of the documents had been "unintentionally discarded."
In addition to USA Today having the story on its front page, the NY Sun had it on its front page and the Wall Street Journal had a long writeup on page two.
So the NY Times is being disingenuous, to put it euphemistically. I think they were just hoping the story would go away.
Thanks all for the advise. My email to NY Times was not calm (I am a FEMALE redhead after all) but I wrote nothing about "evil intent". I brought up the story being on page 17 and asked how they would have treated the story if Condo Rice was in Berger's place. I also let it be known that they managed to get a rumor on the front page last week about Cheney being replace but relegated real hard news to page 17.
We will see what happens tomorrow.
The Los Angeles Daily News got it on the front page.
The NY Times was probably waiting to see if the story had legs (and hoping it did not) before putting it on the front page. Now they will have to cover it to the very end no matter where the story leads.
A reaction, yes. But not a response.
You can get a preview on their website. It's the second story, after one about Microsoft. It focuses on Berger's resignation, and possible political fallout. They don't get into the timing til near the end, and make no mention of claims that Archive personnel witnessed Berger putting documents in his trousers. The trousers claim is treated as an outlandish allegation from Saxby Chambliss. They also have dire need of a fact checker for historical references, as evidenced by this quote: "Earlier this year, Paul O'Neill, the former Treasury Secretary, was found to have used classified material from his tenure in writing a book about the Bush economic team." Memo to NYT: O'Niell was the SUBJECT of the book, not its AUTHOR!
I say hold off for now on your reply... Although we all know they would have held the printing presses for hours if this involved the GOP... We're better and bigger than they are and they know it.
Keep the powder dry for now; we'll have ample opportunity to give them both barrels before all's said and done. Or in other words; let 'em step in it deep before we fire back...
You forgot: Women and Minorities Hardest Hit.
No. Not that late at night. The Times wants to set the agenda, not follow it. To just rehash someone else's story in beneath them. They'd rather wait an extra day and try to publish new info that nobody else has. (Or at least come up with a whole new spin.)
Wait till they bury the story tomorrow, then send the turd a link to this thread!!!
Maybe the story will get two column inches AND move up all the way to page A15.
You might want to point out to him that the Washington Post had a much longer article about the story, and it was on page 2. And they have similar timeframes as far as story deadlines.
Or the Yankee game? They seemed to have a full report on *that* last night, as well as the Mets game.
So let us know tomorrow if their story is fleshed out a little.
Let's see what tomorrow's edition holds on the Berger theft and the Ketchup Gigolo's dropping of him; if they essentially ignore it, let's open up with both barrels.
I think the Times knows it has lost the respect it once had.
When I read the article, tomorrow, I will keep in mind all the points of distortion that Bob Kohn listed in his excellent book "Journalistic Fraud" ---- How the NYT distorts the news and why it can no longer be trusted.
Thanks for the ping.
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.