[conservative in nyc]

To be fair, the New York Times obituary continued inside the paper for a few pages. But they gave it less space on their front page than the Ray Charles obit (which also continued on another page). And it was the ONLY article regarding President Reagan on the front page of the early version of the paper. The picture of Smarty Jones, the Belmont-losing horse, was about as large as President Reagan's. And to add insult to injury, there was a story about Kerry's potential running mates directly below and Abu Ghraib directly to the left of President Reagan's photos.

No U.S. paper has been as disrespectful to President Reagan's legacy over the past week --- except maybe the L.A. Times. There's a reason why some call the New York Times America's Pravda. I wouldn't be shocked if the real Pravda were less biased about Reagan's passing.

[NYCVirago]

To be fair, the New York Times obituary continued inside the paper for a few pages. But they gave it less space on their front page than the Ray Charles obit (which also continued on another page). And it was the ONLY article regarding President Reagan on the front page of the early version of the paper.

Bill Keller, the Times' editor, said in the New York Observer this week that he hadn't heard a single reader complaint about the Reagan coverage. I wrote him and told them I found that hard to believe, particularly when the Times had to issue a press release to justify the coverage! He actually wrote me back, and tried to weasel out of his comments by saying that "maybe" readers had written to the paper's Letters Page, or to the paper's public editor.