The New York Times

[sailaway21]

It's obvious that the NYT needs it's own thread here at sailnet, if for no other reason than to allow us to keep track of unnatural phenomena. The prospect of a Democratic administration only makes the need more pressing. This election cycle should provide a more than ample supply of "truth" from the Times sufficient to keep one's sense of humour up. All posts here should be either NYT articles, articles about the NYT, and related matters.

[sailaway21]

Since David Brooks has forgotten what it means to be a conservative, and he was filling Wm. Safire's shoes, the NYT has found itself in need of a conservative columnist. The selection of Bill Kristol, son of Irving Kristol and founder of The Weekly Standard, has not sat well with the usual suspects.
Herewith the view from the other Times, of London.
http://timesonline.typepad.com/comme...en-letter.html

And the "welcoming" letter Mr. Kristol received from the paper's reader's editor or ombudsman.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/op...=1&oref=slogin

[sailaway21]

The below article, all 7000 words of it, describes how our veterans are returning from war and commiting homicides no doubt due to their unresolved war issues. And, the article purports, they're doing it a lot. There's only one problem; it ain't so. That, however, was no impediment to the story running on last Sunday's front page.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/us...erans+homicide

It took other journalists about ten minutes to research the facts and discover that the article was so much fish wrap. Vet's are 1/6th as likely to kill as their civilian counterparts not exposed to war. Not half, 1/6th. Oops. Below is one of the newpapers that said, "Say What?"
http://www.nypost.com/seven/01152008...ers_265875.htm
http://www.nypost.com/php/pfriendly/...lie_443219.htm

[wind_magic]

I don't normally get into the whole "media bias" thing, but I make an exception with both the New York Times and CNN. They are both very obviously biased towards Democrats.

CNN especially. I was watching it today and CNN is running the same story over and over, about Mike Huckabee saying something about the confederate flag and also about .. I forget, something else that would anger Democrats. That all barely made news most places, but CNN loves to put up the most outrageous crap Republicans say so they can pound away at it with their guests for the next week. Every Democrat story leads, and everything is in the context of how it will affect Democrats. Republicans are little more than props to be used by CNN's guests to get their point across, whatever that point might be.

Edit, I think the most telling thing about bias on CNN was the last Presidential election. When it became obvious that Kerry had lost you could feel the disappointment on CNN, that lady Judy Woodruff even looked like she had started crying.

[teshannon]

I have trouble with NYT and truth in the same sentence. They just never go together.

[xort]

commentary on the times hiring kristol... “That rotten, traiterous [sic] piece of filth should be hung by the ankles from a lamp post and beaten by the mob rather than gaining a pulpit at ANY self-respecting news organization,” said one message. “You should be ashamed. Apparently you are only out for money and therefore an equally traiterous [sic] whore deserving the same treatment.”
Lovely, open minded, liberal thoughts.

[RAGNAR]

zzzz

[sailaway21]

Safire still contributes his column "on language" periodically but his equal on the op-ed page has yet to be found.

The interesting thing about the military homicide article is that, to a dispassionate observer, the first thing one would think to check are the actual statistics. It's not at all like we do not keep track of such things. I seem to have the recollection that one of the central tenets of journalism is to not accept what might be preconceived, or commonly held, notions as facts. Every premise must be verified. Very similar to the application of the scientific method.

In this case, the journalists obviously drew their curve and then plotted the data points to fit, if they even did that. That an editor failed to check the fundamental premise of the entire article speaks loudly to the type of objective journalism being practised at the NYT of recent.

[sailaway21]

Rupert Murdoch has purchased the Wall Street Journal and he's not sitting still. He admittedly has the NYT squarely in his sights. The below article has some insight on the matter as well as a number of things I was unaware of about the NYT. Like the author, I am disinclined to bet against Murdoch.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art..._ny_times.html

[sailaway21]

More on the homicidal soldiers and the NYT. You cannot make this stuff up. (g)http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...k4Y2ZkZTgzYzQ=