Originally posted by Scott J:
Does that mean that you are disputing what I said or just trying to change the subject?
Neither. I'm asking you to clarify bacause I'm unsure what you meant.
Are you really going to suggest that 50% or even 25% of the editors and reporters at the NYT are conservative? Vote GOP?
Ok, you mean just at NYT and not all. I don't know what per cent of the editors and reporters are conservative or vote GOP. Do you?
For a glimpse, we can look at the political makeup of NY itself. It is a Democrat dominated, liberal city.
How do you figure that? This mayor, Bloomberg, and the last, Giuliani, are both Republican. City council
is made up of mostly Democrats, but there are also Republicans (and one Working Families). The governor is Republican, the State Assembly & Senate are Republican controlled. Both US Senators are currently Democrats (usually we have one each.)
Also, there has been polling that shows that consistently 80% of the Washington press corps which includes Times reporters vote Democrat and are in fact liberal.
Ok, now we're off NYT and more general. Who did the polling, how was it conducted and where are the results posted? This is just your assertion unless you provide a source.
Publishers publish. Printers print. They don't often make up the stuff that goes on paper.
Um, publishers
own. They may not make up the stuff but they do control and direct it.
They let Clinton slide. Do you really think a Republican could have had 500 FBI files on opposing Democrats for no legitimate reason in the WH and have remained in office?
Apparently, NYT editorial writer William Saffire trashed Clinton for this on the same day the Times reported that Ken Starr cleared him:
SAFIRE: The committee should grill Starr on other investigations long overdue for as criminal investigation. Now is the time to expose the Clinton manipulation of the F.B.I. in Filegate, as well as White House influence on Justice Department persecution of Travel Office employees...
(NYT, November 19 1998, page A31)
MITCHELL AND SCHMITT: [F]or the first time,
Mr. Starr announced, in his [pre-released] testimony, that
he has exonerated the Clinton Administration of any wrongdoing in the firings of seven employees in the White House travel office and into whether White House officials misused confidential
F.B.I. files of White House and Government employees in their own and previous administrations.
(NYT, November 19 1998, page A1)
Link
Do you really think after the comparatively mild DeLay transgressions that Clinton was "trashed" concerning all of the irregularities and Chinese connections in their fundraising?
The Speaker of the House ethics thing has been going on for some time, back and forth. Compare DeLay with Jim Wright, if you want a fair comparison (big if, though). Yes, Clinton was trashed.
Link
The media didn't even report Monica and Clinton's perjury as news but rather at "he said she said".
You've got to be kidding.
Really? Gore's "Earth in the Balance" contained some things that were absolutely inane as well as politically suicidal... I don't remember the Times exposing his radical views.
Then you apparently missed Michiko Kakutani's November 22, 1999 review of his book wherein she thoroughly trashed him.
Not in any story I read. The stories I saw from the Times and AP were generally Kerry's responses rather than legitimization of the charges.
But they didn't look into the legitimacy of the charges like good reporters ought, did they?
That [behind-kissing] isn't a liberal/conservative issue. If it is then it is more evidence that they are liberal, not less. There are just as many very wealthy liberals and Democrats as there are Republicans. Top executives in large corporations actually favor the Dems somewhat in the last poll I remember. I suspect it is because they view big government as a good customer and also an inhibitor to small company competition. Large corporations find alot to love in gov't regulation... they can afford it while small companies (that are much more likely to be owned and operated by conservative Republicans) cannot. That's why you see small business owners supporting the GOP overwhelmingly. They like low taxes and regulation.
So much for specific charges.
Chicago Sun-Times seemed to be more balanced than most but by no means conservative. The Tribune had flashes of independence as has USA Today.
Unfortunately, almost all newspapers follow the editorial lead of the NYT, Wash Post, and LA Times.
Well, then that would
define them as mainstream....
There
are left-wing media such as the American Prospect, the Boston Review, the ConsortoriumNews, Intervention Magazine, Mother Jones, the Nation, the New Republic, the Progressive, the Progressive Populist, Tom Paine, Washington Monthly, the Village Voice and others.
Try the mocking that is being cast at Kansas right now for considering how to handle evolution in school as an example of innuendo.
Kansas=Missouri? That aside, NYT does recognise the difference between science and religion. Do you have an example of the NYT (name, date) actually mocking the KBOE or is this something you simply assume they would do?
Wasn't it Alec Baldwin or some other like-minded liberal who made the "fly over" country comment? Didn't they pretty much say that our opinions didn't count because we are ignorant?
Mr. Baldwin doesn't work for the NYT last I heard (I'm not familiar with the "fly over" comment).
I didn't mean that the word "stupid" is often used though sometimes it is.
Perhaps it sometimes applies ~~ to
both sides (I won't deny that the liberal community has more than it's fair share of dim bulbs, but that shouldn't taint the entire lot of us).
The divide is real Daisy.
You seem to like it that way, unless I'm misinterpreting you.
Yeah, but
what examples of one-sided reporting/editing have you actually seen by the NYT? By examples, I mean a "for instance" not a vague clain that they are "everywhere".
I complained numerous times to the AP over the way their stories were written during the election.
Ok, we're no longer talking about the NYT, now.
I pointed out the disparities between the way they handled negative news about Bush vs Kerry.
Again, examples? Like, actual quotes or citations....
My observations were LATER borne out by a media watchdog's evaluation of negative reporting.
Uh-huh, and this media watchdog wouldn't happen to be affliated with the conservatives or the Republicans? You neglected to say which one, when and where - too many bald assertions and no actual examples.
(continued...)
