Page 37? O'Reilly, Boortz and Taranto were wrong (kinda)

New York Times, Digg, Opinion Journal, Think Progress ^ | Today | Self

[BillCompton]

In my work I have to read Digg. The moonbats are insufferable over there. This morning I saw a story entitled:
O’Reilly Falsely Claims NYT Failed To Cover JFK Terror Plot On Front Page
digg story
I did not want to click on ThinkProgress link, but they claimed to have a picture. Indeed they did. I read this in the Opinion Journal two days ago and also on Boortz.

Here's the thing: sure they got it technically wrong, but is it possible for the Times to have had it on the Front page in a more obscure location? Unfortunately, we would have to fall into an argument akin to the fake but accurate: false, but true. Not a good strategy. Like Sam Irving said during Watergate, if you are going to eat sh!@, take big bites, don't nibble at it.

[BillCompton]

By the way, the story is in the right hand margin, first story below the fold.

[wolfpat]

It’s like saying that every chapter of a book is on page 1,2 and 3 because that’s where you find the table of contents.

[ishabibble]

Muslim would-be terrorist, U.S. citizen from Guyana, plots with major terrorists to blow up JFK International Airport.

Did the New York Times cover this story with the attention it deserves? No, they didn’t.

All the rest is just splitting hairs.

[Hegemony Cricket]

I would say that by marginalizing this story, they have continued to marginalize themselves.

[jiggyboy]

It would be more correct to call it an advertisement, rather than “coverage”. It’s just an advertisement for their own product.