Biased Times…
So the New York times has finally admitted that it violated its own advertising policies by 1) printing a personal attact ad and 2) giving Moveon.org a discount for running the ad. From the Washington Post article (emphasis mine):
Clark Hoyt said in his column that MoveOn was not entitled to the cheaper “standby” rate for advertising that can run any time over the following week because the Times did promise that the ad would run Sept. 10, the day Petraeus began his congressional testimony. “We made a mistake,” Times spokeswoman Catherine Mathis was quoted as saying.
MoveOn, saying it had no reason to believe it was paying “anything other than the normal and usual charge,” said yesterday that it would send the Times $77,000 to make up the difference.
The Times also violated its own advertising policy, which bars “attacks of a personal nature,” Hoyt reported. He wrote that the episode “gave fresh ammunition to a cottage industry that loves to bash The Times as a bastion of the ‘liberal media.’ “
Is he actually trying to imply that the paper wasn’t being biased when they allowed the ad to run in the first place for a discount?
And then there’s this business of MoveOn sending the NYT $77,000 since they didn’t know they got a discount. Blatant biasness from a supposedly “objective” paper is one thing, but why in the world would an organization spend an extra $77k when they don’t have to! It’s proof that the Looney Left is even crazier than most people realize. Do we really want someone they support to be President, tossing away our money like that? Oh…guess that’s not much different than we have now…
