Posted on 09/23/2007 10:03:57 AM PDT by LdSentinal
RIP
The ad does not constitute an illegal campaign contribution, because it does not advocate or oppose a candidate for election.
McCain-Feingold does not pretend to regulate the speech of revolutionary communists who reject the entire electoral system.
Cute, a column calling on the owners of the NYT to get their act together and get rid of Pinch.
Might as well recommend the Kennedys tell uncle Teddy to get himself in AA.
I don’t have any first-hand familiarity with the Sulzberger family, but I have to wonder whether Pinch is so golden with all his relations that they will back him no matter what. There have been a whole series of crises, he has again and again proven his incompetence, yet they continue to back him.
Don’t they have any cousins or nephews or even nieces to put forward to take his place? Don’t they have any reliable friends whom they could put in as caretakers?
It’s not just his leftist politics. The Times has always been leftist. It’s his incompetence. They pay the highest salaries in the business, yet their editorial writers and reporters are childishly bad. Maureen Dowd alone would be enough to make any decent company ashamed of employing her, but they have dozens of others who are nearly as dreadful.
It extends to the arts, book reviews, science, religion, and every other area of the paper. It’s almost all self-conceited drivel, badly written, barely literate.
I suppose we should be hoping they will keep Pinch on, since he is ensuring the death of a newspaper that is probably unsalvageable at this point.
Did I miss anything?
Congressman Billybob
“and now for all to see, ethically.”
I hope he did not mean to imply that the ethical lapses are any thing new.
Actually, I think the word that Ron Zeigler made famous was “inoperative,” not “inoperable.”
Dan Rather and the NYT: Fake but accurate
I have to wonder if this was just Pinch’s way of getting back in MoveOn’s good graces. The Times is widely blamed on the Left for supporting the war in Iraq (largely due to Judith Miller’s reports on WMD) prior to the invasion.
The company is in a downward spiral financially, strategically, journalistically, and now for all to see, ethically.
Today I read about a Mediot who told him he had a picture of Reagan administration officials involved in a sex orgy, and that he would only show it to RR. Reagan refused to bite, and told him to turn it over to the Attorney General's office, which he didn't (probably because it didn't exist). Those weasels would make up scandals, and lie about his policies, to try to get to him, almost daily. Few of them had honor back then, and even less of them now.
The honesty and the humility of the man shines through. I haven't gotten to the Iran-Contra mess yet, but it will be interesting. It's a great book.
I hope the NYT goes under and they have to sell the equipment for salvage.
My dictionary’s definition of “ombudsman” is that he is someone appointed by the government. I’m lost in this article because I don’t know if the NYT can appoint ifs own ombudsman and call him a “public editor.” Are there two definitions for that title
I remember Rush saying this started during RR's administration, when Tip O'Neil proclaimed, "From now on, our job is to oppose."
Truth no longer mattered, only winning. And, anyone who is paying attention should be able to see it is government corruption that will destroy us and turn us into a 3rd world country. Reagan's statement that we are never more than one generation away from tyranny was prophetic. It seems very few men of character run for office these days, it's all about self-serving power. It's hard to swallow that they are merely a reflection of us, as a people. Where's Mr. Smith when you need him? We need a few hundred Mr. Smiths....right now.
The sad fact is that the public editors at the Times either do their jobs well, and have to be eased out, or they do their jobs poorly, and become an embarrassment. It is a classic situation that is no-win for whomever holds it.
John / Billybob
John, thanks for your present-day explanation of “ombudsman” especially as it applies to the NYT. You’ve taught me something I couldn’t find anywhere else, and it makes the article more understandable.
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.