NY times admits to violating their policies ..

[jameznyhc]

I love how everyone on this forum bashes fox yet this is the 6 or 7th NY Times scandal in the last 3 years


New York Times Says It Violated Policies Over MoveOn Ad

By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, September 24, 2007; A08



After two weeks of denials, the New York Times acknowledged that it should not have given a discount to MoveOn.org for a full-page advertisement assailing Gen. David H. Petraeus.

The liberal advocacy group should have paid $142,000 for the ad calling the U.S. commander in Iraq "General Betray Us," not $65,000, the paper's public editor wrote yesterday.

Clark Hoyt said in his column that MoveOn was not entitled to the cheaper "standby" rate for advertising that can run any time over the following week because the Times did promise that the ad would run Sept. 10, the day Petraeus began his congressional testimony. "We made a mistake," Times spokeswoman Catherine Mathis was quoted as saying.

MoveOn, saying it had no reason to believe it was paying "anything other than the normal and usual charge," said yesterday that it would send the Times $77,000 to make up the difference.

The Times also violated its own advertising policy, which bars "attacks of a personal nature," Hoyt reported. He wrote that the episode "gave fresh ammunition to a cottage industry that loves to bash The Times as a bastion of the 'liberal media.' "

Many Republicans have seemed to prefer talking about MoveOn's ad rather than the war itself.

On Thursday, President Bush called the ad "disgusting," saying that "most Democrats . . . are more afraid of irritating [MoveOn] than they are of irritating the United States military."

On Friday, the Senate voted 75 to 25 to denounce the ad. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), the Democratic presidential front-runner, was questioned repeatedly about the ad yesterday while taping interviews with all five Sunday talk shows.

Clinton said she did not approve of personal attacks from any quarter but avoided criticizing MoveOn by name.

The group told its 3 million members by e-mail that some might think "the language went too far. . . . But make no mistake: this is much bigger than one ad."



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/23/AR2007092300752_pf.html

[GOLDEN]

i stull cant believe they printed the ad nevermind giving the discount

[John Kennedy]

Can't stand the NY Times anymore for news.. they've been trying too much to be activists. I stick to my AP & Reuters newswires and the WSJ.

[Benny B]

Can't stand the NY Times anymore for news.. they've been trying too much to be activists. I stick to my AP & Reuters newswires and the WSJ.

every newspaper / news organization all have an a biased view. i dont care what side it is left / right.. the fact is everyone of them is biased in one way or the other.. i do NOT believe there is a single news outlet out there that is completely unbiased 100%

[John Kennedy]

every newspaper / news organization all have an a biased view. i dont care what side it is left / right.. the fact is everyone of them is biased in one way or the other.. i do NOT believe there is a single news outlet out there that is completely unbiased 100%

When it comes to plain old news, there are many that are unbiased. As far as editorials and op-ed sections, of course many slant in some direction. But when you start giving preferential treatment to only the news headlines that support an obvious political agenda, and strategically place advertisements, and "endorse" political candidates from the news room, etc.. you've lost credit in my book as a news source.

[Defekted]

NYT's oped section is on the liberal/left side....thats known....just like WSJ is right leaning, and post is a coloring book.

but the news, the meat and potatoes of the paper is fantastic and indepth.... not tabloid bullshit.

[John Kennedy]

NYT's oped section is on the liberal/left side....thats known....just like WSJ is right leaning, and post is a coloring book.

but the news, the meat and potatoes of the paper is fantastic and indepth.... not tabloid bullshit.

The content is legit, I'm not disputing that, but thier timing, placement, emphasis is all suspect to me. It really annoys me sometimes. They don't have consistent priorities, it seems very politically motivated, as was the case with this ad placement. What a hit to their credibility and evidence to their bias as a newspaper to hand a discount to moveon.org.

[Defekted]

The content is legit, I'm not disputing that, but thier timing, placement, emphasis is all suspect to me. It really annoys me sometimes. They don't have consistent priorities, it seems very politically motivated, as was the case with this ad placement. What a hit to their credibility and evidence to their bias as a newspaper to hand a discount to moveon.org.

i give minimal attention to an ad. It is what it is, it wasnt nyt sponsored, it was moveon, nyt isnt on the moneon.org board and has zero imput on the content of ads..... like i said before ive seen ads that span the entire spectrum of politics (from patriotic support the troops to antiwar, etc)

Whats important to understand is the republicans have nothing to stand on. They live for slight of hand issues, if they can squeeze the life out of this ad "scandal", lol, so they can deflect attention at ummmmm lets see, A FUCKING WAR, than thats a win for them....

and the sad thing is, a massive amount of this population is dumb enough to actually be fooled.


This is a nonissue.... they should have never even voted to condem it, by doing so they gave it legitamcy. Moveon ad was out of line but struck at a key point, very poor choice in wording and using childish insults is counter productive.... took away from the fact that there is a lot of cherry picking regarding the metrics coming out of iraq, and the fact that this surge is openended and the troop reduction coming next year is a reduction that will HAVE to be made due to soldiers reaching their tour duty end dates.... so its all a politcal show....all bullshit.....

we will be back to pre surge levels with no end date no time line open ended..... for a war the american public by in large is against.....

the democrats do not know how to fucking stand up against stupid little fucking tricks like this ad..... they need to stay focused..... as if they have to apologize to the party who questioned the patriotism of kerry and cleeland....war heros...... while they back draft dodgers and little cokehead pussies....

[John Kennedy]

i give minimal attention to an ad. It is what it is, it wasnt nyt sponsored, it was moveon, nyt isnt on the moneon.org board and has zero imput on the content of ads..... like i said before ive seen ads that span the entire spectrum of politics (from patriotic support the troops to antiwar, etc)

Whats important to understand is the republicans have nothing to stand on. They live for slight of hand issues, if they can squeeze the life out of this ad "scanda", lol, so they can deflect attention at ummmmm lets see, A FUCKING WAR, than thats a win for them....

and the sad thing is, a massive amount of this population is dumb enough, to actually be fooled.


This is a nonissue.... they should have never even voted to condem it, by doing so they gave it legitamcy. Moveon ad was out of line but struck at a key point, very poor choice in wording and using childish insults is counter productive.... took away from the fact that there is a lot of cherry picking regarding the metrics coming out of iraq, and the fact that this surge is openended and the troop reduction coming next year is a reduction that will HAVE to be made due to soldiers reaching their tour duty end dates.... so its all a politcal show....all bullshit.....

we will be back to pre surge levels with no end date no time line open ended..... for a war the american public by in large is against.....

the democrats do not know how to fucking stand up against stupid little fucking tricks like this ad..... they need to stay focus..... as if they have to apologize to the party who questioned the patriotism of kerry and cleeland....war heros...... while they back draft dodgers and little cokehead pussies....

I agree with most of what you're saying, but to give a discount to a specific organization to run a specific ad, steps outside of "non-affiliation".

It definitely shouldn't have run through congress, but that's the story of capitol hill this year, pussyfooting and spending days on "resolutions" and "condemnations" that bring us nowhere.

[Defekted]

I agree with most of what you're saying, but to give a discount to a specific organization to run a specific ad, steps outside of "non-affiliation".

It definitely shouldn't have run through congress, but that's the story of capitol hill this year, pussyfooting and spending days on "resolutions" and "condemnations" that bring us nowhere.

it was definitely a mistake by the nyt's ... they should stay above the fray and not give easy points to the prowar group whose numbers dwindle every day...

and as far as getting things done in congress, thats wishful thinking! lol

Like i said before, nothing is going to get done until we got a dem in office in '08.... plus the reps stand to loose a few more seats also..... might have the numbers finally to get some traction on getting this war to a close. They know that why will never win a game of chicken with a lunatic born again

[jameznyhc]

NYT's oped section is on the liberal/left side....thats known....just like WSJ is right leaning, and post is a coloring book.

but the news, the meat and potatoes of the paper is fantastic and indepth.... not tabloid bullshit.

too bad the coloring book is what exposed the Times, lol..also exposed spitzers dirty tricks, ..not bad for a coloring book huh