Race 4 2008 Blog: More On The Hideous NYT Piece
By LJ
According to Mark Halperin, the McCain campaign provided the New York Times with significant documentation regarding the context for their story and yet, they chose not to include it in their hit piece. Why doesn’t that surprise me? The fact that they chose to run the piece at all, even though its main accusations fail to include a single named source or even the tiniest shred of evidence amounts to a complete abdication of journalistic integrity.
Why did the Times chose today to run the story? Well, it seems that Gabe Sherman over at The New Republic was working on a piece dealing with why the Times had the story in late December but chose not to run it. It was scheduled to be put online tomorrow night. In order to preempt TNR, the Times ran the story first. Astonishing.
I will post the entire McCain campaign release below the fold. I encourage everyone to read it.
Read the Entire Article Click Here
By LJ
According to Mark Halperin, the McCain campaign provided the New York Times with significant documentation regarding the context for their story and yet, they chose not to include it in their hit piece. Why doesn’t that surprise me? The fact that they chose to run the piece at all, even though its main accusations fail to include a single named source or even the tiniest shred of evidence amounts to a complete abdication of journalistic integrity.
Why did the Times chose today to run the story? Well, it seems that Gabe Sherman over at The New Republic was working on a piece dealing with why the Times had the story in late December but chose not to run it. It was scheduled to be put online tomorrow night. In order to preempt TNR, the Times ran the story first. Astonishing.
I will post the entire McCain campaign release below the fold. I encourage everyone to read it.
Read the Entire Article Click Here
What Some Folks are Saying about Times Hit Job ...
Jim Geraghty - National Revue Online: “No identified sources? No on-the-record sources? All we get is ‘according to two former McCain associates,’ presumably that reference to one Senate, one campaign.” CLICK HERE TO READ ARTICLE
Jennifer Rubin - : “Remarkably, the Times’ online reader comments suggest a high dose of skepticism about the sourcing and value of the story.” CLICK HERE TO READ ARTICLE
Marc Ambinder- The Atlantic: “ … nothing to suggest that McCain compromised his political principles.”
CLICK HERE TO READ ARTICLE
Power Line: “Tomorrow's story is just one more reminder of why no sophisticated person takes the Times seriously as a news source.” CLICK HERE TO READ ARTICLE
Rich Lowry - The National Revue: “The Times doesn't have the goods—at least from what's in the story—and shouldn't have run it.” CLICK HERE TO READ ARTICLE
New York Daily News: “It's all there - except a clear and firm direct allegation, let alone proof.” CLICK HERE TO READ ARTICLE
Phil Klein - American Spectator: “ … the NYT doesn't seem to have the goods on anything actually done wrong.” CLICK HERE TO READ ARTICLE
No comments:
Post a Comment