|
| ||
|
|
|
| |||||||
|
« About the 'record turnout' for Obama... |
Blog Home Page
| Obama raps »
July 20, 2009 NY Times reaches a new low (updated)
Back at the time of the William Kennedy Smith rape trial in Florida, in the 1990s, the NY Times had published the name of the alleged rape victim after the local New York WNBC television station aired it. Later, at the trial, the then-head of the National Enquirer was entering the court building when journalists asked him if he would be also publishing the name of the alleged rape victim.
In answering in the negative, an incredible role reversal occurred. The National Enquirer publisher lifted his nose and sneered, "Who do you think we are? The New York Times?" This month, Noel Sheppard's Newsbusters reports:
Gov. Palin's hairdresser has denied the charges, Newsbusters goes on to say.
Even my own low opinion of the New York Times has been lowered. They have now become Maureen Dowd Meets The Weekly World News. What Rush Limbaugh has referred to as "The Chickification of the News" is in full oeuvre here. The New York Times is now publishing a gossip opinion about Gov. Palin's hair - with no medical evidence to back up their catty remark. Did their reporters overhear this in the lunchroom of an exclusive Manhattan private girls' school? Or was it written on a bathroom wall? The Times is obviously clearly afraid of Sarah Palin. But who thought that they would sound like a girls' lunchroom clique IN PRINT, documenting their fear for all the world to see? Perhaps the two authors of this Times article, Jim Rutenberg and Serge F. Kovaleski, could take some lessons from the Alaskan Governor on how to comport themselves. Update: Jim Rutenberg of the New York Times writes:
Here is a link to the Times' response. |
Recent Articles
Blog Posts
|
|
|
Share