Replies

Mark Helprin the former ABC Political Director and now one of the executives of Time Magazine sent this memo to his staff at ABC News durinf the 2004 election of Bush vs. Kerry.

October 8 2004:

"It goes without saying that the stakes are getting very high for the country and the campaigns - and our responsibilities become quite grave

I do not want to set off (sp?) and endless colloquy that none of us have time for today - nor do I want to stifle one. Please respond if you feel you can advance the discussion.

The New York Times (Nagourney/Stevenson) and Howard Fineman on the web both make the same point today: the current Bush attacks on Kerry involve distortions and taking things out of context in a way that goes beyond what Kerry has done.

Kerry distorts, takes out of context, and mistakes all the time, but these are not central to his efforts to win.

We have a responsibility to hold both sides accountable to the public interest, but that doesn't mean we reflexively and artificially hold both sides "equally" accountable when the facts don't warrant that.

I'm sure many of you have this week felt the stepped up Bush efforts to complain about our coverage. This is all part of their efforts to get away with as much as possible with the stepped up, renewed efforts to win the election by destroying Senator Kerry at least partly through distortions.

It's up to Kerry to defend himself, of course. But as one of the few news organizations with the skill and strength to help voters evaluate what the candidates are saying to serve the public interest. Now is the time for all of us to step up and do that right. "

What a great discourse from Mark Helprin on how to shill for RATS and why the Times must do this above all.

Of course his attempt at a justification of this fits the dinosuar(media)extinction model beautifully.

No bias there of course.

/sarchasm - the gaping hole between a liberal and reality.

A Mafia Don would have been too smart to put this in writing.