At the New York Times, its all the news or in this case editorials that they want and politically agree with that is fit to print. The Old Gray Lady should hang her head in shame once again. Is it any wonder why people have flocked to the internet and away from print.
The discussion of whether the MSM is bias no longer needs to be argued. It is not whether the MSM is liberally bias, it is just a matter to what extent and severity. Less than one week after the New York Times published an editorial from Democratic candidate Barack Obama, they have rejected one from Republican John McCain. The NYT wanted McCain to mirror Obama’s. These people will stop at nothing to get Obama elected.
The paper’s decision to refuse McCain’s direct rebuttal to Obama’s ‘My Plan for Iraq’ has ignited explosive charges of media bias in top Republican circles.
‘It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama’s piece,’ NYT Op-Ed editor David Shipley explained in an email late Friday to McCain’s staff. ‘I’m not going to be able to accept this piece as currently written.’ (Drudge Report)
It is just simply amazing that the editorial board of a newspaper wanted an editorial to be a work of fiction rather than one’s opinion and views, “NYT’s Shipley advised McCain to try again: ‘I’d be pleased, though, to look at another draft.’” Does anyone really think that Obama was treated this way by the Times? Or did they actually spell check and correct grammar for Obama. Once again the NY Times has shown its true colors and the disgrace that it has become. Its nothing but pathetic and overt media bias … standard … what standards!
The reality is their defense of their politically bias actions are actually worse than The NY Times original denial of McCain’s OPED. Could the New York Times be any more transparent in their coverage?
The Obama piece worked for me because it offered new information (it appeared before his speech); while Senator Obama discussed Senator McCain, he also went into detail about his own plans.
It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama’s piece.
However, the actions of the NY Times has back fired and proved that bias and stupidity are never the answer. Because the NYT’s rejected a Presidential candidates editorial is such an over the top way, John McCain’s editorial was actually probably read by more people than who would have originally done so. Thank you New York Times for your coverage, although that was obviously not your intention.
Maybe some one would like to ask the obvious question to the NYT’s and Barack Obama … How does one write and better yet print an editorial about the Iraq war and a vision before one has actually gone there? If the NYT had standards, they would have waited until after Obama came back. If Obama had any standards … he would have done the same.