New York Times editor blames readers for dustup over John McCain article

NY Daily News ^ | 2/23/08 | KENNETH R. BAZINET

[jimbo123]

The embattled executive editor of the New York Times defended its John McCain story Friday with a novel explanation for the flood of critical e-mails the newspaper received: slow-witted readers.

"Personally, I was surprised by the volume of the reaction," Bill Keller wrote in a Times Web site Q&A forum. Readers posted 2,000 comments and sent in 3,700 questions.

"I was surprised by how lopsided the opinion was against our decision, with readers who described themselves as independents and Democrats joining Republicans in defending Mr. McCain from what they saw as a cheap shot," Keller added.

The problem, Keller went on, is that readers didn't get it.

"Frankly, I was a little surprised by how few readers saw what was, to us, the larger point of the story."

[kittymyrib]

LOL...so true. If no one read the NYT, that would solve the problem.

[Tom_Busch]

That point, he said, was that McCain, “this man who prizes his honor above all things and who appreciates the importance of appearances, also has a history of being sometimes careless about the appearance of impropriety, about his reputation.”

Uh yeah that’s the ticket.

[shuckmaster]

I bet the NY Daily News is picking up a few subscribers these days.

[atomic conspiracy]

Took the words right off my keyboard. If people didn’t try to read the vile fishwrap, it would quickly be consigned to the dustbin of history where it belongs.

[NavVet]

“Frankly, I was a little surprised by how few readers saw what was, to us, the larger point of the story.”

As much as I despise McCain and would never vote for him, I think the larger point of the story is that the Times was happy to be a cheer leader for “the maverick” as long as he was bucking the conservative base, but now that they have achieved their goal of marginalizing conservatives and suppressing the conservative vote, it is time to break out the long knives and start carving up McCain for the Benefit of Obama. After all why have a liberal, when you can have a Marxist.

[wai-ming]

"Frankly, I was a little surprised by how few readers saw what was, to us, the larger point of the story."

The larger point of the story is that the New York Times will do anything to insure that the Demos get the White House.

[NittanyLion]

That point, he said, was that McCain, "this man who prizes his honor above all things and who appreciates the importance of appearances, also has a history of being sometimes careless about the appearance of impropriety, about his reputation."

Uh huh. The NYT slanders McCain and then blames him for creating an appearance of impropriety. No matter how many examples I see, I'm still constantly amazed at the level of insular thinking at the Slimes.

And I don't even like McCain.

[Chode]

blaming the readers, is like kerry blaming the voters...

[Erik Latranyi]

"I was surprised by how lopsided the opinion was against our decision, with readers who described themselves as independents and Democrats joining Republicans in defending Mr. McCain from what they saw as a cheap shot," Keller added.

Just another liberal who thinks he is more intelligent than everyone else.

Nothing changes with these people.

[Jemian]

Typical abusive husband. “She asked for it. She deserved it. It’s her fault.”

I wonder how his wife is.

[FreedomPoster]

This story is turning into a positive for McCain’s campaign.

[Free_at_last_-2001]

Spot on!

[atomic conspiracy]

[gusopol3]

Times Managing Editor Jill Abramson defended the part of the article that caused the biggest uproar - the concerns of two unnamed former McCain advisers that the senator was having a romantic relationship with Iseman.

Of Strange Justice and the sliming of Clarence Thomas fame? Good Night, this is the woman's stock in trade. A little psychobabble , one wonders if she's suppressing memories of familial childhood sexual abuse.

[TN4Liberty]

If the NYT dislikes McCain, I may have to rethink my position.

[NonValueAdded]

“Those stupid readers ...”

[Dacula]

Didn’t Keller leave his first wife because the woman he was having an affair (his current wife) got pregnant.

I guess it is ok for a liberal to have an affair and run a newspaper, but not a republican.

[bcsco]

That point, he said, was that McCain the New York Times, "this man who newspaper which prizes his its honor above all things and who which appreciates the importance of appearances, also has a history of being sometimes careless about the appearance of impropriety, about his its reputation."

There, fixed it. Obviously Mr. Keller didn't get the big point.

[BluH2o]

... but now that they (NY Times) have achieved their goal of marginalizing conservatives and suppressing the conservative vote

How so? McCain with his ascendancy to front runner for the pubbie nomination is largely responsible for that ... no self respecting conservative (I know) reads the NY Times. Further, even if they did, it would not sway them in the least ... in fact, it would only prompt them to send more money to the GOP.