Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (27322)	4/26/2002 7:54:27 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 281500

You know I think the NY Times does exactly what you are talking about, but in this case the story is headlined, "Washington Memo" which gives the appearance of a opinion piece. It may surprise you that I agree with this. I thought the piece was not an illustration but the charge fits; as does a similar charge against the reportial staff of the WSJ. For one, it's inescapable. The question for me is not whether reporters and their editors have views of the world and its proper functioning that effect everything from choice of story, to adjectives in the story, to whatever. The question is rather whether they adhere to a reasonably professional standard of getting the sourcing right, whether they try to treat different points of view with some degree of accuracy, and whether they are honest about their own positions. On that latter score, I have yet to find a newspaper which fills the bill. The other point to be made is that the NYTimes hammered brother Clinton mercilessly. It's not new for the Times to ask serious questions about a presidency. I thought they've given Bush a much too long honeymoon. Once the 9-11 aura fades, and perhaps that's what is happening, then we'll see more of the customary presidential critique. Hopefully.