| Author | Comment | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Blackedward |
#41 | ||||
|
Posts: 2447 07-22-08 5:31 PM |
McCain didn't like the rules and thus chose not to participate.Have the rules changed for NYT? Were the candidates made aware of changes? I do not recall a major legit news organization ever refusing to run a candidate's words during a campaign. But I could be wrong. This just smacks of media bias to me... -Ed
Last Edited By: Blackedward 07-22-08 5:34 PM.
Edited 1 time.
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
vizco |
#42 | ||||
|
Posts: 3268 07-22-08 5:34 PM Raid Peon |
Because the people who control the op-ed page set the rules for said page.No question. It's their ink and their paper, but why is it wrong to point out that a supposedly unbiased publication (yeah, I can hardly type that without spitting out my drink) is in the tank for one candidate? I'm sure Pravda had rules back in the day about who could and couldn't get space. If National Review published an article by McCain but didn't want one by Obama, or The Washington Monthly published one by Obama, but wouldn't publish McCain no one would bat eye: they are partisan supporters of one candidate. So is the New York Times.  Harmony of Souls : My Quiver All this science I don't understand; it's just my job five days a week. |
||||
|
|
|||||
 Falkahnhan |
#43 | ||||
|
Posts: 2699 07-22-08 6:07 PM |
The NYT... demonstrating what most of us have known for a long time.
- Joe
I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which grants a right to Congress of
expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.
- James Madison |
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Gandol teh Pirate |
#44 | ||||
|
Posts: 2576 07-22-08 6:12 PM Time-traveling
|
That it's a private newspaper whose editors are trying to control the content?
Zarr's contextualized position on slavery:
For a humorous example, I sold myself as a slave at a charity auction once. I ended up spending the day chopping wood at a farm. It's slavery, but it's far from immoral. |
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Gandol teh Pirate |
#45 | ||||
|
Posts: 2576 07-22-08 6:16 PM Time-traveling
|
This thread, like almost no other, highlights exactly what the board "liberals" are.That we're people who, when push comes to shove, back down from ugly, bigoted positions you like to hold dear? I can respect that, at least.Losing the respect of people like you (Feyd) is something I don't want to have happen. My apologies to everybody on the board for saying something that doesn't reflect any sentiments I hold for Jews nor any other ethnicity as a whole.
Zarr's contextualized position on slavery:
For a humorous example, I sold myself as a slave at a charity auction once. I ended up spending the day chopping wood at a farm. It's slavery, but it's far from immoral. |
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Falkahnhan |
#46 | ||||
|
Posts: 2699 07-22-08 7:43 PM |
That it's a private newspaper whose editors are trying to control the content? And they control their content to provide a bias toward liberal politicians and ideals.
- Joe
I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which grants a right to Congress of
expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.
- James Madison |
||||
|
|
|||||
|
ellocopato |
#47 | ||||
|
Posts: 3908 07-22-08 8:54 PM
|
Brandon Gore wrote: what exactly is your bitch? a posted mentioned that the other poster didn't really need to throw out an epiteth to make his point who has since has
apologized. it was a done deal. do you want to make a case out of it? there are certainly alolt of slurs that are thrown around here. ethnic, religious.
what have you. are you calling for a more moderated forum? I can certainly provide a strictly moderated political forum, but I'm pretty sure you
wouldn't like it.
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Vydas |
#48 | ||||
|
Posts: 353 07-22-08 8:56 PM |
I don't get the whole discussion. The NYT wants McCain to add new, original, material (at least suggesting his own ideas). What's so wrong with that?
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Vydas |
#49 | ||||
|
Posts: 353 07-22-08 8:56 PM |
I don't get the whole discussion. The NYT wants McCain to add new, original, material (at least suggesting his own ideas). What's so wrong with that?
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Blackedward |
#50 | ||||
|
Posts: 2447 07-22-08 9:08 PM |
As a news organization, should the New York Times be "making" or manipulating news?
-Ed |
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Vydas |
#51 | ||||
|
Posts: 353 07-22-08 9:39 PM |
Blackedward wrote: Should the NYT be held to a different standard than any other 'news organization'?
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Kayso Gnomehater |
#52 | ||||
|
Posts: 4987 07-22-08 9:40 PM BANNED |
vizco wrote:Yes. most professional journalists are for Obama. And most professional Dentists are for brushing your teeth. Anyone who's been paying attention to politics for the last 8 years as part of their job is, for the most part, solidly for Democratic candidates for national offices. And, because we know this, we spot bias when it's blatant and, because it sometimes is blatant, we make it up when it doesn't exist. On the other hand, we know Faux News caters to the Borofins of the country. And we know they do things like talk about Obama being a terrorist. So, the next time a Republican Senator is exposed to be a closeted homosexual living a lie, and they put a "D" next to his name, I'll assume they're just hoping to appeal to the outrage of all the angry white Christians watching. But, there's also always the chance it was just a typo. In this case, it sounds like McCain didn't want to follow instructions. |
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Zifnab |
#53 | ||||
|
Posts: 2739 07-22-08 9:51 PM |
Losing the respect of people like you (Feyd) is something I don't want to have happen. My apologies to everybody on the board for saying something that doesn't reflect any sentiments I hold for Jews nor any other ethnicity as a whole.I was 25% offended. |
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Kayso Gnomehater |
#54 | ||||
|
Posts: 4987 07-22-08 10:05 PM BANNED |
Gandol teh Pirate wrote: First, let me say Borofin should be the one speaking for Jews. He knows who is or isn't a Christian. He knows who is or isn't a true Muslim -- It's the crazy ones, btw. But, since Borfin hasn't posted on this, let me say I laughed. For the record. As for Fascism, there is an argument to be made that handing over control of the government to private corporations is just as fascist in the end result.
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Blackedward |
#55 | ||||
|
Posts: 2447 07-22-08 10:12 PM |
Should the NYT be held to a different standard than any other 'news organization'?I hold them all to the same standard. I believe I have never linked to a Fox piece...guilty of CNN though. I openly oppose the use of blogs as credible news sources. I have been vocally critical of the usual network/cable Talking Heads. How news agencies address both sides of this campaign will speak to just how powerful "media" and their handlers have become. The subject of debate within this thread is the New York Times. Why shouldn't the Times just come out in full support of Sen. Obama and stop running any news about Sen. McCain? -Ed |
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Kayso Gnomehater |
#56 | ||||
|
Posts: 4987 07-22-08 10:23 PM BANNED |
Why shouldn't the Times just come out in full support of Sen. Obama and stop running any news about Sen. McCain?
Because it's their job to cover both. It's not their fault that you can't polish a turd. They didn't make McCain really old. They didn't give him really bad positions on several important issues. They didn't make him call his wife a cunt or whore or whatever. They didn't make him put on the knee pads for the same assholes on the religious right that fucked him back in 2000. Maybe McCain should try sucking less and start dealing honestly with how poorly his party has run the country for the last 8 years? The times sure didn't hate him when we was running against Bush back in 2000. |
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Blackedward |
#57 | ||||
|
Posts: 2447 07-22-08 11:00 PM |
Because it's their job to cover both.How can they do this in good faith at this point? -Ed |
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Borofin |
#58 | ||||
|
Posts: 3774 07-22-08 11:24 PM Community Member |
Part of the premise for the book is the overuse of the word by leftists misapplying it. He then shows exactly why it is often properly applied to their side of
the spectrum. I'm sure the leftist's reactions here and elsewhere defending the Times in this outrage would get at least a few paragraphs in a rewrite.
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Fishbeak |
#59 | ||||
|
Posts: 2662 07-23-08 12:00 AM |
but why is it wrong to point out that a supposedly unbiased publication (yeah, I can hardly type that without spitting out my drink) is in the tank for
one candidate?
Nobody is suggesting it's wrong to point out bias where you see one. However when you see bias in everything cough*boro*cough it gets a bit absurd. I am not going to defend the NYT as I don't read them often so frankly don't know nor care what their bias may or may not be. I do think you're missing the mark though Viz - they didn't say they wouldn't publish McCain's essay, they said they wanted it to hit certain points. Call me silly but I thought that's exactly what editors were supposed to do. The NYT wants McCain to add new, original, material (at least suggesting his own ideas). What's so wrong with that? Absolutely nothing is wrong with that =) It's called good editing. Or if you're so inclined it's liberal bias. As a news organization, should the New York Times be "making" or manipulating news? You're confused a little. And I don't post that in a mean way. Really. This isn't news, this is the op-ed page. Not news, opinion writing. Two very different animals.
Borofin's bitch
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
Muerta |
#60 | ||||
|
Posts: 2671 07-23-08 9:05 AM Legend in the making... |
His response reads almost like "a letter to the editor." I suppose that they could have done it like Obama, then McCain retorts, but it's not like its a news piece.
Arianna Huffington (on McCain and Iraq): It's his Viagra.
Steven Colbert: I guess then the warning label should be, if your erection lasts more than 100 years, pull out! |
||||
|
|
|||||
