All The News We Decide Is Fit To Print
The NY Times decides there is nothing to the election irregularities-all the dark sinister theories on blogs have been dismissed.* "A Snowball of Hearsay". They accuse blogs of selectively reporting on the story.
This is from the same paper that broke the Whitewater "story" and printed hearsay about this alleged Clinton crime-constantly printing stories and editorials stating basically that the NYTimes has decided that there is smoke, thus fire, and that the Clintons must prove their innocence. Afterwards, they decided it was the Clinton's fault for the 'scandal' as they 'stonewalled the investigations' (refused to confess) and 'defamed their critics' (defended themselves).
Gene Lyons said that the Times reporter Jeff Gerth "omits any facts or exculpatory evidence that argue against the line he is promoting."
The Times is the same paper that printed all those definitive "Iraq has Weapons of Mass Destruction" articles dictated by Iraqi exile Ahmed Chalabi("A Strawman Of Hearsay") directly to their reporter Judith Miller.
Of course they had to end up printing an apology, which has been called nothing less than a primer on how not to do journalism, particularly if you are an enormously influential newspaper with a costly invasion of another nation at stake.
And is there any need to remind anyone of Jayson Blair?
Yes, but you can't trust blogs because sometimes they're wrong.
*Except the one where Bush got the extra 4000 votes in one Ohio precinct. Also, the Times itself wrote a story about how angry the mainstream media was about their exit polls, which at the end showed Kerry up 51-48. They neglect to mention how the Times, the major networks and the White House itself were all convinced that Bush was going to lose until at some point in the evening, Florida and Ohio "began to turn to Bush".
This is from the same paper that broke the Whitewater "story" and printed hearsay about this alleged Clinton crime-constantly printing stories and editorials stating basically that the NYTimes has decided that there is smoke, thus fire, and that the Clintons must prove their innocence. Afterwards, they decided it was the Clinton's fault for the 'scandal' as they 'stonewalled the investigations' (refused to confess) and 'defamed their critics' (defended themselves).
Gene Lyons said that the Times reporter Jeff Gerth "omits any facts or exculpatory evidence that argue against the line he is promoting."
The Times is the same paper that printed all those definitive "Iraq has Weapons of Mass Destruction" articles dictated by Iraqi exile Ahmed Chalabi("A Strawman Of Hearsay") directly to their reporter Judith Miller.
Of course they had to end up printing an apology, which has been called nothing less than a primer on how not to do journalism, particularly if you are an enormously influential newspaper with a costly invasion of another nation at stake.
And is there any need to remind anyone of Jayson Blair?
Yes, but you can't trust blogs because sometimes they're wrong.
*Except the one where Bush got the extra 4000 votes in one Ohio precinct. Also, the Times itself wrote a story about how angry the mainstream media was about their exit polls, which at the end showed Kerry up 51-48. They neglect to mention how the Times, the major networks and the White House itself were all convinced that Bush was going to lose until at some point in the evening, Florida and Ohio "began to turn to Bush".
posted by BlueMan at
6:21 AM
