Cynical Nation

The problem with the NYT is the same perceptual problem that most of the MSM media suffers from.

Since over 85% of the reporters, editors, etc are Liberal Democrats that viewpoint is "Centerist" within their milieu, thus their penchant for labeling even moderate Conservative voices "Conservative," while not labeling any Liberal voices - "Why label the perceived center?"

*blink* The Post endorsed Clinton? Really? Are you sure? Is this really the same paper whose readers (tongue in cheek or not) voted the same Clinton the second most evil person of the last millenium? :P

I'm pretty sure the Times endorsed Chris Callaghan for Comptroller. Isn't he Republican? Which isn't to say they were exactly elephant friendly this year, but one doesn't = none. Unless Callaghan isn't a Republican, in which case, never mind.

Looks like you're right, K. They endorsed Callaghan "with some trepidation." The Daily News story, it seems, was referring strictly to congressional races.

BTW, I like this backhanded swipe at New Jersey, from the NYT's lackluster endorsement of Callaghan:

Rather than choose between Mr. Hevesi and Mr. Callaghan, some political and civic leaders have called for Mr. Hevesi to resign, hoping that the political powers can then pick another candidate. While he could not be taken off the ballot, the public could presumably be told whom they would be getting if the departed comptroller won the election. That strategy smacks very much of the Albany political culture, in which almost anything can be papered over by a few powerful officials sitting down privately to make a deal. The public should choose between the candidates offered, and that means they should choose Mr. Callaghan.

I have to say that I'm not exactly thrilled with either Hevesi or Callaghan. Or Cuomo or Pirro for that matter. It all looks very grim. So, status quo, I suppose.

Oh yeah, that reminds me. The Post endorsed Cuomo too.

Say... why do I read the Post again?

Oh yeah, Page Six.

Hey Barry,
Dont all the NYT rag :) It is the best newspaper in the country. By far. And, yes, I am subscriber (leaving out of NY) for many years now. It is the ONLY newspaper I trust.

Wow. Too many typos today. Maybe is the Haloween effect.

"It is the best newspaper in the country. By far. And, yes, I am subscriber (leaving out of NY) for many years now. It is the ONLY newspaper I trust." (BW)
IS the best fictionalized news on record...better than the Daily Show...by far.

From Walter Duranty who won a Pulitzer (should've been a fiction pulitzer) for his fictional accounts of "the Worker's Paradise" that was the USSR of the 1930s to Jayson Blair, a rank amateur compared to Duranty...and the many, many more in between.

They do provide some comic relief with their Op-Ed page however, especially that former pseudo-economist, Paul Krugman's pontifications about anything & everything.

He's funnier when he writes about politics, because when he writes about economics, it becomes clear why he's no longer an economist - he's virtually never right, which is an astoundingly difficult thing to manage.

> It is the ONLY newspaper I trust.

I can't say I'm surprised. Thank you for the confirmation, though. ;-)

So tell me, Blue. Which NYT do you trust? The one that leaked the details of the anti-terror banking data surveillance program? Or the one that said the Times was wrong to do so?

So tell me, Blue. Which NYT do you trust? The one that leaked the details of the anti-terror banking data surveillance program? Or the one that said the Times was wrong to do so?

Both

Yep, that's what I thought.

Many media companies are biased, but claim they are not. Fox News (Fair and Balanced?) rings a bell. It's usually because of ownership issues.

In any event, it is difficult to avoid bias, because editors have to make decisions about what news to present and how to present it. Being human beings, it is very difficult to totally distance yourself from your own beliefs. Ultimately, someone HAS to make a decision about whether a news item is important, and how to treat it.

The great thing (and not so great thing, sometimes) about the internet is now anyone with some motivation can be their own editor and present their own news.

Well, ideally, the editorial and op-ed pages are biased, but the rest of it aren't. But being human...most are not so successful at that distance.

The NYT is boring. For real entertainment I watch Fox, specifically Hannity & Colmes.

Sean Hannity makes the NYT slant seem like the Salt Flats by comparison. I have clocked him at over 14 lies in a single minute. Sometimes he puts more than 4 lies in a single sentence.

After a long filibuster whopper-fest, Colmes will get .5 seconds to respond, which he wisely uses with a blank look and "Uhhh ... ummmm."

It is classic comedy.

"In any event, it is difficult to avoid bias, because editors have to make decisions about what news to present and how to present it. Being human beings, it is very difficult to totally distance yourself from your own beliefs." (Tracy Miller)
"That's precisely the reason that America's Conservative majority (Conservatives outnumber Liberals by better than two-to-one) want a more balanced media...actually one that would more accurately reflect America's actual or real political spectrum.

We NEED more Fox News', we NEED tow of the three networks (ABC, CBS, NBC), we NEED more of the major newspapers.

In fact, I'd argue that ONLY that kind of switch on the part of our newpapers might save the print industry.

As major newpaper circulation goes down, the NY Post (Barry's favorite paper) is gaining in circulation...and it's not ALL due to "Page Six."

Remember that when asked, I call myself a conservative. Many liberals call themselves progressives or moderates.

Conservative is an umbrella for many people with quite different beliefs. Liberal is a term so villified and sullied by wingnut talkers that few identify with it.

Your 2 to 1 margin is imaginary.

You simply don't know what "Conservative" means, because you're kind of dopey.

Conservatives, among other things, almost ALWAYS believe lowered tax rates bring in more tax revenues - cause they do.

They believe in stopping illegal immigration, but maintaining a legal form of immigration, including temporary immigration for students and for H-1B Visas to deal with "Structural Unemployment" (we need more H-1B Visas today, as many fields, like accounting, don't have enough Americans trained to take those jobs).

They believe in even stronger domestic security and a military war against those rogue states that have funded, harbored and sponsored international terrorism, in the belief that THAT will be the best way to defang the terrorists themselves.

YOU seem to stand against ALL those things.

Ergo, you're not a "Conservative."