Posted on 05/05/2009 7:53:29 AM PDT by SmithL
For your consideration.
Not to worry, they will get a bail out.
Just the fact that something like this appears in the SFC is encouraging. I still believe that the MSM, including newspapers, will make a hard turn right to save the business. If my theory that money trumps all else is correct, even ideology, then it must occur soon to save the business, and prove my theory correct.
LEANING? LEANING?
I suppose that the Socialist Worker “leans” Left too.
The first job of an editor is to ensure proper grammar. The SF Chronicle should go down in flames for letting in split infinitives. Probably they just want Saunders to look bad.
“Liberal newspapers helped build conservative media.”
So true and a message worth repeating over and over again.
I think this lady is the token conservative at the SF Chron. She is a good writer too. There are some conservatives in San Fran. The 2008 election had something on there about a sewer plant named after Bush and it was voted down. A few other liberal things were also voted down.
The trouble with reporting is that it’s too dull and boring, everyone envisions himself a knowledgeable pundit with something important to say — the only true reporting today is by the obituary writer.
No, the trouble is that it is a lot easier to express an opinion than to acquire and communicate accurate and useful information.
Reading a budget is hard. Explaining it is hard. But if written right you will read it sooner than someone's blovations about it.
Isn't Cinnamon Stillwell there too? Or is she at the SFGate?
I would have, until recently, agreed with you — that's certainly what we were incessantly told in grammar class. However, the rules have been heatedly debated; and are gradually being eased.
It seems that the rule originated in an attempt to import Latin rules of grammar. Since Latin infinitives cannot be split (being single words) — it followed that English infinitives should not be split. Or so went the reasoning.
Agree, Obama is not about to let the NYT, Washington Post, LA Times and some others go belly up as these are his main conduits so to spread his propaganda to the gullible and feeble minded who tend to believe everything they read.
How true! Reporters should only report who, what, when, where, and how. Editorials should comment on the why.
I'd be happy with a newspaper that simply printed what our various Congresscritters said, with no excess verbiage. IOW:
Today on the floor of the House, Congressman X said "I like cheese." Congressman Y responded, "I like jelly."
Let the readers figure it out.
MAY THE BITTER END COME SWIFTLY
At almost all newspapers, they might as well put a rack of soup bowls by the door. They can just drop off their brain on the way out, and pick up one off the rack when they return the next day - no labels needed, since the intelligence and reasoning processes are identical for all of them!
If we can’t uphold standards in formal written language, it is little wonder we can’t uphold standards in behavior.
Yes. They are simply extensions of Gibbs and Obama’s PR department.
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.