wow NYT is biased, now even they admit it.

wacki · #1 10-17-2004, 01:52 AM

Hahahah this is so funny. My room-mate said they shouldn't even be refered to as a newspaper anymore. I don't know if I would agree, but it's so sad that this used to be my favorite paper.

http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/h...0410171113.htm

NYT link

wacki · #2 10-17-2004, 02:00 AM

There is no denying that this race is mainly about Mr. Bush's disastrous tenure. Nearly four years ago, after the Supreme Court awarded him the presidency, Mr. Bush came into office amid popular expectation that he would acknowledge his lack of a mandate by sticking close to the center. Instead, he turned the government over to the radical right.

when talking about Kerry

We appreciate his sensible plan to provide health coverage for most of the people who currently do without.

No mention of the cost. Or how he will raise the funds.

He is a longtime advocate of deficit reduction.

Did they look at his voting record?

Wow, I could write a better pro-Kerry opinion article than they can, and I'm not even voting for the guy. What a sham the NYT has become.

anatta · #3 10-17-2004, 02:15 AM

Okay, I linked to the first one and its something called "the Hindu" about some election I think in China. I am tired so I didn't really read it, but what is so funny?

I linked to the second. Nothing but the truth here.[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Which one used to be your favorite paper, the Hindu or the Times?

1111 · #4 10-17-2004, 02:19 AM

This is the opinion section...what exactly is your point?

wacki · #5 10-17-2004, 02:22 AM

NYT's used to be my favorite.

The NYT's is officially endorsing Kerry.

And no I don't think that article is nothing but truth.

1111 · #6 10-17-2004, 02:32 AM

I think that the article is both rational and informed. I have no problem with them outlining the reasons for supporting Kerry clearly so that everyone knows where they stand on this issue.

I find the labeling of numerous news sources as being "liberally biased" to be much more disturbing than a paper making their position known. I think the job of the press in a country setup like ours is to be both incisive and persuasive and this is a very good example of that.

wacki · #7 10-17-2004, 02:36 AM

They are allowed, to have an opinion, but I will continue this later. Got2Go.

Cyrus · #8 10-17-2004, 03:05 AM

"NYT is biased, now even they admit it. Hahahah this is so funny. They shouldn't even be refered to as a newspaper anymore. It's so sad that it used to be my favorite paper."

No, the sad part here is you.

A newspaper is endorsing a political candidate, as has happened, lemmee see, about a million times before in American politics, and is happening routinely across the US as we speak, and you think this is equivalent to the newspaper admitting that it is biased?!

You are making too much out of nothing.

NYT endorsing John Kerry is not news. (Nor "revelatory" of bias, Virginia.) What would be news is if NYT endorsed Dubya -- or Fox endorsed Kerry.

...You seem a little confused right now. Is this because you've been browsin' websites about French History all week? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

wacki · #9 10-17-2004, 03:58 AM

I never said that they aren't allowed to endorse a candidate. But when the NYT says Bush has turned the goevernment over to the radical right, I have to laugh. Will comment more later.

Cyrus · #10 10-17-2004, 04:09 AM

"When the NYT says Bush has turned the goevernment over to the radical right, I have to laugh."

With satisfaction, I presume. Because there is little doubt that the religious fundamentalist, no-holds-barred imperialist (read Time for more), and anti-civil freedoms Right has indeed usurped the office of the Presidency in the United States.

"Will comment more later."

Please do.

[img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]