Rip nyt

August 13, 2009
National Enquirer scoops NY Times - again

Ethel C. Fenig
While the New York Times was wasting its money digging up non scandalous information about Sarah Palin in Alaska, it missed a story more or less under their computers and thus was scooped by...The National Enquirer on a real scandal.

Yes, vice president and president wannabe, John Edwards (D), worried about two Americas, was part of the America where men were having an affair with one of their employees (external - login to view) while pretending to be happily married.

Once again, for some reason, the Enquirer has somehow scooped all the major news media by breathlessly reporting (external - login to view)that yes indeed, he is the father of his ex-mistress' child--not one of his buddies who Edwards paid to take the rap for him.

Yes, the two Americas that Edwards whined about has expanded--one where children grow up in two parent homes and one, where children are raised by a single parent, usually the mother, because of an absentee parent, usually the father. Edwards is the latter.

And Edwards' latest child might join her older half siblings as part of the second America--an America where one parent is incarcerated. With charges of violating campaign finance laws, that's where he might end up.

And to think all the major news media couldn't find this out.
Yes yes but did you see Kirsty Ally?

Gonna die in 4 years cause of the yo yo diet.

Durka and I are going to have to go on The Road Trip Of Mercy
in order to save Kirsty's life. We may have to camp out onyour front lawn for a couple days to sober us up for the return home to Canada and rehab. You may want to hide the younger more sensitive types before we arrive as this could get...
The National Enquirer is hardly the apex of responsible journalism. I am not even sure if the fiction writers that author its stories have any idea of what verification means.
Some NE headlines:

"Mao Tse Tung Sends Message of Revolution From Beyond Grave"
"Psychics Are Just Charletans Used By Imperialist Dogs To Control The Population - psychic says "
"Secret Police Shocker: Rebellious Teenager Hoards Banned Copies of 'The Old Man and the Sea!'"
"Woman Gives Birth to 8 lb. Pearl"
"Town in panic over 2,000 UFO sightings"
"I'm a Cher wannabe in a man's body"
"Jerry Lewis's son weds 300lb computer date"

lol And these stories were not picked up by the majority of the newsmedia. Go figure.
NYT backs off of WashTimes charge
By: Politico Staff
August 14, 2009 06:31 PM EST
John Solomon, executive editor of The Washington Times, wrote in a staff-wide e-mail on Friday that The New York Times has backed off a charge that the Washington paper has been “decidedly opposed” to President Barack Obama.

“I'm glad to report that the New York Times has formally called to apologize,” Solomon wrote.

POLITICO has asked The New York Times for a comment and will add it when it arrives.

The New York paper wrote Friday in a front-page article about the origin of the “death panel” rumor about President Barack Obama’s health plan: “The specter of government-sponsored, forced euthanasia was raised as early as Nov. 23, just weeks after the election and long before any legislation had been drafted, by an outlet decidedly opposed to Mr. Obama, The Washington Times.”

Solomon e-mailed his staff late this morning: “By now many of you know that The New York Times wrongly and unfairly besmirched your good reputation in a front-page story this morning about health care. I want you to know that we've told the Times and … the rest of the media world that we found it wrong, inaccurate, irresponsible and insulting for the New York Times to brand an entire newspaper as ‘decidedly opposed’ to President Obama because of the voice of its editorial pages. Nothing can be further from the truth when it comes to the hard work of performance of our newsroom. Our news pages have no agenda except to accurately and fairly cover the news, including that made by the administration.”
September 19, 2009
New York Times Company humiliates itself in public

Thomas Lifson
This just looks bad. Really bad. The New York Times Company has been required to reveal startling management incompetence, an inability to correctly apply its own executive compensation scheme to the top two figures in the company, overpaying the bosses. Publicly-traded corporations like the Times must file a Form 8K within four days of various events (external - login to view), so the details of the screw-up are now on the record. The company filed the 8K (external - login to view) following the end of trading yesterday. A summary of the substance is here (external - login to view).
It is deeply embarrassing to have to admit that your level of management professionalism is so low that you can't follow your own rules. The top admitting that it overpaid itself makes it worse. But when the two executives discovered to be hauling away a bit too much lucre turn out to be Pinch Sulzberger and Janet Robinson, on whose watch the company's fortunes have plummeted, the whole thing becomes a sick joke on the shareholders.
Even worse, the two beneficiaries of the excess largesse, who are also the two people responsible for maintaining a level of management sufficient to follow the rules, are not going to lose anything! The company is actually going to make them whole.
Mark Fitzgerald and Jennifer Saba of Editor & Publisher write (external - login to view):
... to compensate the two for the lost value, the board of directors' compensation committee drafted up a new plan granting "replacement" SARs, or stock appreciation rights.

Both Robinson and Sulzberger enjoy million dollar-plus salaries (external - login to view) with upside potential of 200% under the company's bonus compensation scheme. This at a time when the newsroom endures layoffs and printers have lost their high paying blue collar livelihoods. Sacrifice is the order of the day in the ranks.
It seems to me that on a symbolic level this action in making the poeple responsible for the mess whole is incredibly stupid. The two people at the top helped themselves to more than was allowed. And when the error is discovered they get rewarded. The editorial staff and the general public see all this.
This doesn't sound like the proper way to rescue a failing company, which needs the loyalty of its employees and customers. People take their cues from the behavior at the top.
In Japan, the honorable thing to do would be to resign in disgrace.
Lame Gray Lady: NYT Scrubs Major Portion of Original Obama-Olympics Article, Inserts Meeting with McChrystal

By Tom Blumer
October 4, 2009 - 10:23 ET

Those who read the New York Times's coverage (external - login to view) of the unsuccessful results of Barack and Michelle Obama's attempt to seal the 2016 Summer Olympics bid for Chicago on Friday afternoon ('For Obama, an Unsuccessful Campaign") might want to read it again. If it doesn't seem the same, it's because it isn't.
Blogger Weasel Zippers (external - login to view) (HT Hot Air Headlines (external - login to view) via Instapundit (external - login to view)) caught the Times committing a major scrub of the story. But it's really worse than that.
An excerpt of the item's first five paragraphs posted at FreeRepublic (external - login to view) at 4:44 Eastern Time on October 2 shows that the article was apparently originally published under the same title with Peter Baker's byline sometime Friday afternoon.
There are even more substantive differences noticed by Weasel Zippers I will get to shortly, but the first five paragraphs alone were obviously worked over, while Jeff Zeleny's name was added to the byline.
After the jump, on the left you will see the original as excerpted at FreeRepublic; on the right are the first five paragraphs currently at the Times web site (saved here at my host (external - login to view) for future reference; click here or on the graphic to view a larger side-by-side version in a separate window):
It's not too difficult to determine that the revised coverage waters down Baker's original on-the-scene observations.
Going, going, gone (external - login to view).
Bar Sinister
May I be the first to say - this muckraking qualifies as news? Who cares?
no new posts