The Slimes' coverage has been absolutely disgraceful.
They devoted more front page space to the Ray Charles obituary article (3 columns) than the Reagan obituary article (1 column). They have put a news analysis hit piece on the Reagan legacy masquerading as news on their front page today and gossip about which Reagan appointees weren't being invited to the funeral masquerading as news on their front page yesterday... instead of a "just-the-facts" article about the funeral ceremonies. The pictures they have chosen for their front page have usually been group shots, depersonalizing the event. Their editorials and op-ed columnists (especially Krugman) have been disgraceful, attacking the Reagan legacy before he is in his grave. And they are blatantly using their editorials and "news" articles to draw parallels between President Reagan and Senator Kerry.
The Old Grey Whore should just admit they hate President Reagan and are cynically using his legacy to support the candidacy of a Senator who hated him and get it over with.
BTW -- C-Span's off of the Rotunda coverage.
They devoted more front page space to the Ray Charles obituary article (3 columns) than the Reagan obituary article (1 column).
That was astonishing, I went to do a quick comparison, the (British)
Daily Telegraph obituary was around 3,500 words, the N.Y.T. c.700. I knew that the Times was bad, but it is utterly ridiculous when a foreign newspaper writes an obituary five times longer.
If you want to read what the Telegraph said, it is available at
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&targetRule=10&xml=/news/2004/06/07/db0701.xml
F.W.I.W. The B.B.C. has been giving decent coverage. The whole of the funeral was live on their main channel, as well as their 24 hour news channel.