Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

At least the Wa Po Ombudsman is tking themm to the wood shed ...
1 posted on 07/12/2009 11:59:16 AM PDT by Lmo56
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Lmo56

taking them - that is ... dumb fat fingers !!!


2 posted on 07/12/2009 12:00:04 PM PDT by Lmo56
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Lmo56
Is someone suggesting that Obama’s propaganda machine shouldn't be selling access to his administration? /s
3 posted on 07/12/2009 12:08:53 PM PDT by highlander_UW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Lmo56
WaPo: "We have special access to legislators and administrators, not available to private citizens, that we will sell for $25K a night."

Now who would find a Moral or Ethical problem with that?

4 posted on 07/12/2009 12:10:21 PM PDT by ZOOKER ( Exploring the fine line between cynicism and outright depression)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Lmo56

It wasn’t an “ethical lapse” of any proportions.

It was a case of getting so drunk on a belief of that final arrival in Otopia that you forgot to conceil your agenda from the little people. That’s all.

Your god in the white house is drinking the same potion, and will encounter the same outcome, soon enough.


5 posted on 07/12/2009 12:12:05 PM PDT by Steely Tom (RKBA: last line of defense against vote fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Lmo56

The Wa Poo had ambitions to be the supreme influence peddler and DC power broker, but their chief of morals said they couldn’t be so blatantly obvious about it.


7 posted on 07/12/2009 12:30:24 PM PDT by YHAOS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Lmo56

Oh dear! Does this hurt WaPo as the leading mouth for the RAT party? My oh my, Katharine Weymouth won’t be the elite DC hostess with the mostess.


9 posted on 07/12/2009 1:17:21 PM PDT by lilylangtree (Veni, Vidi, Vici)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Lmo56
...others inside and outside the newsroom were aware that sponsored events would involve news personnel in off-the-record settings, although they lacked details. Several now say they didn't speak up because they assumed top managers would eventually ensure that traditional ethics boundaries would not be breached.

And what traditional ethics boundaries would those be?

Truly, to use any of the words "traditional", "ethics" or "boundaries" in any sentence concerning today's news/opinion journalists, much less in the same sentence, is

laughable in the extreme!

10 posted on 07/12/2009 1:22:28 PM PDT by Albion Wilde (If ten percent is good enough for Jesus, it ought to be good enough for Uncle Sam. --Ray Stevens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Lmo56
Neither Weymouth nor Brauchli can recall anyone raising concerns, although both say they wish someone had. They were all aboard a fast-moving vehicle that, over a period of months, roared through ethics stop signs and plowed into a brick wall.

Is this from Onion? Who wrote this -- Conan O'Brien? Puleeeeeeze. "Somebody stop me -- I'm doin' it in spite of myself! Help! Poor me!"

Just like Governor Sanford. Wonder if the coverage will be at all comparable? BWAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!

11 posted on 07/12/2009 1:25:19 PM PDT by Albion Wilde (If ten percent is good enough for Jesus, it ought to be good enough for Uncle Sam. --Ray Stevens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Lmo56
A key player in the controversy is Charles Pelton, who joined the company May 18 as general manager of a new Washington Post Conferences & Events business.

Felt, Pelton, what the hellton....

12 posted on 07/12/2009 1:28:10 PM PDT by Albion Wilde (If ten percent is good enough for Jesus, it ought to be good enough for Uncle Sam. --Ray Stevens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Lmo56
The Post has internal "Standards and Ethics" guidelines that stress the importance of newsroom neutrality.

The first line says: "This newspaper is pledged to avoid conflict of interest or the appearance of conflict of interest, wherever and whenever possible." Later, it states the newspaper "is committed to disclosing to its readers the sources of the information in its stories to the maximum possible extent."


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! This article is just one belly laugh after another! I can hardly get though it! In fact, this guy's nose has grown all the way out here to Baltimore County, Maryland, where it is tickling my ribs!

13 posted on 07/12/2009 1:39:36 PM PDT by Albion Wilde (If ten percent is good enough for Jesus, it ought to be good enough for Uncle Sam. --Ray Stevens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Lmo56
"I wish I had the perspective I now have of understanding how people would perceive an event like this," said Weymouth. "I didn't perceive it. It's my responsibility." Weymouth, a Harvard College and Stanford Law School graduate, joined the Post in 1996 and has held several positions, none in the newsroom. She is the granddaughter of the late Katharine Graham, the legendary Post publisher, and is the niece of Post Co. chief executive Donald E. Graham.

Let's see:
Harvard, check.
Stanford, check.
Law School, check.
Nepotism involving a long-time power-playing DC family, check.

A perfect DC résumé.

14 posted on 07/12/2009 1:44:48 PM PDT by Albion Wilde (If ten percent is good enough for Jesus, it ought to be good enough for Uncle Sam. --Ray Stevens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Lmo56
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.

Liberal journalism success formula:

* Dumb down the public with misinformation and distortion; label it "objective" and "unbiased."
* Pay yourselves extremely well; live in one of the most expensive cities in the world; hang out at trendy restaurants and private homes with only your own kind.
* Sneer at middle-class people, especially if one of them runs for office.
* Sneer at conservatives generally, and conservative news sources in particular.
* Blame tanking sales on bloggers in pajamas, casting them as beneath you in intelligence.
* Cite the public's ignorance of your ethical lapses to imply that, really, nobody cares if you did something wrong.

15 posted on 07/12/2009 2:00:15 PM PDT by Albion Wilde (If ten percent is good enough for Jesus, it ought to be good enough for Uncle Sam. --Ray Stevens)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson