It is STILL bubbling!
1 posted on
07/11/2009 1:56:30 PM PDT by
abb
To: 04-Bravo; aimhigh; andyandval; Arizona Carolyn; backhoe; Bahbah; bert; bilhosty; Caipirabob; ...
2 posted on
07/11/2009 1:58:13 PM PDT by
abb
("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
To: abb
The only 'flaw' in the plan was that it became a matter of public knowledge.
3 posted on
07/11/2009 1:59:57 PM PDT by
YHAOS
To: abb
where are the indictments?
To: abb
Ethical lapse my you know what. These guys are real losers.
7 posted on
07/11/2009 2:13:38 PM PDT by
freekitty
(Give me back my conservative vote.)
To: abb
Publisher Katharine Weymouth and Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli have now taken full responsibility No, "full responsibility" would entail resigning.
They've only said, "Whoops, my bad."
To: abb
"As of late this week, only two Post readers cited the controversy as a reason for canceling their subscription. Only about 50 readers had written critical letters to the editor, about half the number The Post typically receives on a controversial topic." Which tells us that the Post finally lost its last two subscribers with any common sense, basic intelligence or moral conviction.
The few remaining Post readers are hopelessly dimwitted, babbling fools who actually think they've "won".
10 posted on
07/11/2009 2:20:14 PM PDT by
justkate
To: abb
Neither Weymouth nor Brauchli can recall anyone raising concerns, although both say they wish someone had. Well, they're in luck. Next time they come up with some unethical harebrained scheme, the whole newsroom will stand up and tell them...in unison.
11 posted on
07/11/2009 2:23:32 PM PDT by
GOPJ
( Obama Administration: Soft & Sweet with Enemies. Tough & Unfair with Friends.)
To: abb
The Washington Post's ill-fated plan to sell sponsorships of off-the-record "salons" was an ethical lapse of monumental proportions. Does journalism really have a code of ethics? You know, like doctors, lawyers, engineers and CPA's do? A code which is clearly stated and constantly enforced? One which requires you to take periodic continuing professional education courses and requires you to pass tests on your knowledge of the rules and your handling of various situations? One where you can lose your license and face civil and/or criminal prosecution for violating its tenets?
Or is this more made-up bullcrap from a craft pretending to be a profession?
13 posted on
07/11/2009 2:33:01 PM PDT by
Zakeet
(Obama: Always wrong, never in doubt.)
To: abb
“Publisher Katharine Weymouth and Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli have now taken full responsibility...”
.
What does that mean?
15 posted on
07/11/2009 2:49:05 PM PDT by
353FMG
(Death is Life without Freedom.)
To: abb
"Several now say they didn't speak up because they assumed top managers would eventually ensure that traditional ethics boundaries would not be breached."
lolololololololololololololololololol
16 posted on
07/11/2009 2:52:33 PM PDT by
Psycho_Bunny
(ALSO SPRACH ZEROTHUSTRA)
To: abb
“Publisher Katharine Weymouth and Executive Editor Marcus Brauchli have now taken full responsibility...”
When did they resign? That is “full responsibility”. This,on the other hand, is little more than token hand wringing.
19 posted on
07/11/2009 3:20:41 PM PDT by
rod1
To: abb
Who were these lawmakers, administration officials, think tank experts, business leaders and heads of associations? What was their cut going to be?
Sounds like an influence prostitution ring to me, with WaPo as the pimp.
21 posted on
07/11/2009 3:33:50 PM PDT by
ptgustan
(Marxist thought stinks on ice.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson