Gee, I love my tagline. It’s accuracy is at LEAST equal to that of the Times.
One thought, though, It would also be accurate if it read
NY TIMES: WE PRINT THE NEWS IF IT FITS OUR VIEWS
The NY Who? Never heard of it.
The economic impact of the Obama/Pelosi Recession greatly leverages the effect of any protest or boycott of the evil Old Grey Hag’s declining number of advertisers.
Now is the time to strike!
So who should we write e-mails to to protest their advertising in the NY Slimes? Names, products, e-mails please!
And answering my own question leads to the following user friendly link:
http://boycottnyt.com/take-action/
Among those with useful insights on the New York Times's refusal to cover the Chas Freeman controversy, Don Feder was blistering: "In a sane world," he wrote, "Freeman wouldn't even be allowed to read National Intelligence Estimates, let alone be responsible for generating them. The Times's efforts to low-key this disastrous appointment is typical of its attempts to run interference for the administration." ... "Here you have the man who is preparing the National Intelligence Estimates, which are crucially important to national security, and to say he's a man with 'questionable ties' is the understatement of the year. His foundation [the Middle East Policy Council] was funded by [Saudi] Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, an advocate of 'stealth jihad.' He's [on] the board of China's overseas oil company. Normal people would look at that and say there might be a problem here. The New York Times decided not to cover the story because they didn't want to cause problems for an Obama appointee." ... "Take the March for life in Washington, D. C. You have 250,000 to 300,000 people show up. In the New York Times: nothing. No photo, no story, not even a national brief. Nothing. The Times has decided that what it chooses to recognize as news is news, and nothing else is. As soon as he was in office, Obama immediate abolished the Mexico City policy and says he's going to push the Freedom of Choice Act -- a radical reorientation of administration policy on abortion. Despite all that, 300,000 in Washington, protesting that, is not news to the New York Times. If it were a pro-FOCA rally of 25,000 people, or 25 people, that's news. But not this."