Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Editors Grapple With How to Cover Swift Boat Controversy
Editor and Publisher Magazine ^ | August 24, 2004 | By Joe Strupp

Posted on 08/24/2004 6:31:01 AM PDT by viewfromafar

NEW YORK As the John Kerry swift boat controversy navigates itself from the shoreline of the 2004 presidential campaign into the mainstream, newspapers face a dilemma of how to report on the attacks against the Democratic nominee without giving them undue credibility or blowing the issue out of proportion.

Alison Mitchell, deputy national editor for The New York Times (Click for QuikCap), points to the changing media landscape and its impact on what newspapers choose to cover. "I'm not sure that in an era of no-cable television we would even have looked into it," she said.

But Washington Post Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr. said newspapers can still drive their own agenda. "I don't think we are lessening at all our judgment of the news," he told E&P. "There is much more media, but we still judge for ourselves which facts we report in The Washington Post."

In the past week, Page One stories have appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, USA Today and other dailies both scrutinizing the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and its accusations against Kerry, while also reporting on the effect the group's advertising is having on the Democrat's strategy.

Since Kerry chose to alter his policy and approach the group's criticism head-on, editors contend that made the story ripe for front-page coverage. But some of the coverage has lapsed into the "he said, she said" variety.

"Kerry has made his Vietnam service a centerpiece of the Democratic National Convention and the Swift Boat Veterans came out right after that," said Lee Horwich, politics editor at USA Today, which ran a story about the veterans group, and inconsistencies in its accounts, on Aug. 16. "There has been doubt cast on some of their charges and we have reported it. I think scrutiny of the accuracy of the charges has been the thrust of the coverage."

James O'Shea, managing editor of the Chicago Tribune, agreed. But he said the critical approach may have been a bit late, considering that the Swift Boat Veterans ads came out two weeks ago. "I don't think there has been enough scrutiny until now," he said. "Prior to this, we weren't giving it enough attention."

But O'Shea also pointed out that giving the anti-Kerry veterans too much attention, in an attempt to hold them accountable, creates a situation of ignoring other issues. He said this may be an instance of a growing problem for newspapers in the expanding media world -- being forced to follow a story they might not consider worthwhile because other news outlets (in this case, Fox News and talk radio) have made it an issue.

"There are too many places for people to get information," O'Shea said. "I don't think newspapers can be the gatekeepers anymore -- to say this is wrong and we will ignore it. Now we have to say this is wrong, and here is why."

Downie said he believes the Swift Boat Veterans coverage had been fair and properly scrutinizing. "We have printed the facts and some of those facts have undermined Kerry's opponents," he said. "We are not judging the credibility of Kerry or the (Swift Boat) Veterans, we just print the facts."

He defended a lengthy Post story that ran Sunday which appeared to give equal credibility to both Kerry's version of the events in Vietnam (which is supported by his crewmates and largely backed up by a paper trail) and the Swift Boat Veterans, despite the fact that previous stories in the Post and the New York Times had debunked many of the group's accounts.

On Monday, Michael Tomaskey, writing for The American Prospect's Web site, took issue with Downie's decision: "The Washington Post should not even be running such a story ... in the first place. Len Downie and the paper's other editors would undoubtedly argue that the story represents the Post's tenacity for getting to the truth, without fear or favor. But what the story actually proves is that a bunch of liars who have in the past contradicted their own current statements can, if their lies are outrageous enough and if they have enough money, control the media agenda and get even the most respected media outlets in the country to focus on picayune 'truths' while missing the larger story."

The swift boat controversy and its coverage have also provided fodder for ombudsmen during the past few days. Paul Moore at The Sun in Baltimore cited the need for reporting to include all aspects of the veterans group's activities. "News stories about this group are legitimate, but because the group's televised ads have been paid for by supporters of President Bush, the partisan nature of the material is unmistakable," he wrote.

Dennis Ryerson, editor of The Indianapolis Star, also weighed in with a column about the challenges of the story. "The media are caught in the middle," he opined. "We are often criticized for covering the noise rather than the light, the political infighting as opposed to the substance of major issues. I think we need to cover both."

Finally, Sherrie Mazingo of the Star Tribune in Minneapolis wrote that readers were getting overwhelmed by some of the coverage. "The claims and counter-claims ... have become a significant distraction," she said.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: kerry; leonarddownie; liberalmedia; media; msm; partisanmediashill; partisanmediashills; swift; swiftboatveterans
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-80 next last
get this.
1 posted on 08/24/2004 6:31:02 AM PDT by viewfromafar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
NEW YORK As the John Kerry swift boat controversy navigates itself from the shoreline of the 2004 presidential campaign into the mainstream, newspapers face a dilemma of how to report on the attacks against the Democratic nominee without giving them undue credibility or blowing the issue out of proportion.

Translation, how in the hell do we cover kerry's ass, but still make it look like we are giving the Swiftee's a fair vetting.

2 posted on 08/24/2004 6:33:28 AM PDT by commish (Freedom Tastes Sweetest to Those Who Have Fought to Preserve It)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
I wonder if telling the truth ever occurred to them.
3 posted on 08/24/2004 6:35:08 AM PDT by SpeakingUp (Kerry lied, The NYT lied, and nearly 2 Million Cambodians DIED)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar

So, without Fox NEws (notice his "no-cable" news comment???) they'ed would have ignored the Swift vets?

Of course!

ABCCNBCBS is ignoring them now!


4 posted on 08/24/2004 6:35:10 AM PDT by Robert A. Cook, PE (I can only donate monthly, but Kerry's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
Hilarious. With apologies to Bob Dylan, I sing, "Wring dem hands..."

For the 40 years that I have been following politics, this is (almost) a great enough spectacle to make the continuous propaganda enema worth it: seeing the media in its final meltdown as the truth becomes more important than their ability to suppress it.

5 posted on 08/24/2004 6:36:17 AM PDT by jammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar

Funny, they didn't have to grapple too much with how to cover Bush's service. They actually researched the allegations that he was a deserter, etc.


6 posted on 08/24/2004 6:36:29 AM PDT by The Old Hoosier (Right makes might.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
Amazing. This is why we have Independant media

Alison Mitchell, deputy national editor for The New York Times, points to the changing media landscape and its impact on what newspapers choose to cover. "I'm not sure that in an era of no-cable television we would even have looked into it," she said.

7 posted on 08/24/2004 6:36:33 AM PDT by byteback
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar

Not one person in this piece asks how to get Kerry to answer his own contradictions.

Look, the Swifties are not perfect. They need to be scrutinized by journalists.

But, by golly, Kerry has changed his positions so much on this that his own contradictions are ripe for examination. The fact that not one of these folks understand this is disturbing.


8 posted on 08/24/2004 6:36:45 AM PDT by rwfromkansas (BYPASS FORCED WEB REGISTRATION! **** http://www.bugmenot.com ****)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar; Congressman Billybob; neverdem; Howlin
""There are too many places for people to get information," O'Shea said. "I don't think newspapers can be the gatekeepers anymore -- to say this is wrong and we will ignore it. Now we have to say this is wrong, and here is why."

Blame, utter, comtimpable bias.

And THEY are ones showing HOW they planned their bias!

9 posted on 08/24/2004 6:37:21 AM PDT by Robert A. Cook, PE (I can only donate monthly, but Kerry's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
"I don't think newspapers can be the gatekeepers anymore -- to say this is wrong and we will ignore it. Now we have to say this is wrong, and here is why."

No chance of them saying, "This is interesting and we're looking into it."

Newspapers must just hate it that they can't suppress the news anymore.

10 posted on 08/24/2004 6:38:50 AM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar

"when in doubt, tell the truth" Mark Twain


11 posted on 08/24/2004 6:39:12 AM PDT by Oztrich Boy ("Despise not the jester. Often he is the only one speaking the truth")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
newspapers face a dilemma of how to report on the attacks against the Democratic nominee without giving them undue credibility or blowing the issue out of proportion.

Give me a break! No issue has been blown out of proportion more than Bush's service in the National Guard.

12 posted on 08/24/2004 6:39:49 AM PDT by KJacob (God's purpose is never the same as man's purpose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar

-" I think scrutiny of the accuracy of the charges has been the thrust of the coverage."-

The problem is they also decide which "facts" to scrutinize. Apparently they're willing to scrutinize all Cash-and-Kerry opposition, but where are their demands for a realease of his military records, so they can also be scrutinized? Parasites.


13 posted on 08/24/2004 6:40:05 AM PDT by AmericanChef
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

Here's an absolutely fearless prediction, based upon nothing but intuition and common sense..The Kerry camp is desparate to stop the bleeding caused by the Swifites..they are trotting out new vets to corroborate Kerry's stories.. anyone wanna bet that because of the haste with which these folks are being pushed forward, they aren't being vetted, and that one of those who newly claims to have been there will turn out have spend his tour stateside, or worse..


14 posted on 08/24/2004 6:40:07 AM PDT by ken5050 (Bill Clinton has just signed to be the national spokesman for Hummer..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SpeakingUp
I wonder if telling the truth ever occurred to them.

It would give them the advantage of surprise.

15 posted on 08/24/2004 6:40:26 AM PDT by Oztrich Boy ("Despise not the jester. Often he is the only one speaking the truth")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
Unbelievable. Has the bias of the America hating "news" media ever been so blatant?

"There are too many places for people to get information," O'Shea said. "I don't think newspapers can be the gatekeepers anymore -- to say this is wrong and we will ignore it. Now we have to say this is wrong, and here is why."

IOW, we've been outflanked, it's time to lie.

16 posted on 08/24/2004 6:41:53 AM PDT by Faraday
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar

Gosh, where does one begin with this blatant admission of bias and picking & choosing which "facts" get reported?


17 posted on 08/24/2004 6:42:20 AM PDT by handy (Forgive me this day, my daily typos...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
On Monday, Michael Tomaskey, writing for The American Prospect's Web site, took issue with Downie's decision: "... a bunch of liars (ed. Swift Boat Veterans) who have in the past contradicted their own current statements can, if their lies are outrageous enough and if they have enough money, control the media agenda and get even the most respected media outlets in the country to focus on picayune 'truths' while missing the larger story."

Oh my goodness. Just when you thought you'd seen the height of cynicism and hypocrisy in the world, there's this.

In a related story from The American Prospect: War Is Peace, Slavery Is Freedom, Ignorance Is Strength.

18 posted on 08/24/2004 6:42:33 AM PDT by Dr.Deth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar

"On Monday, Michael Tomaskey, writing for The American Prospect's Web site, took issue with Downie's decision: "The Washington Post should not even be running such a story ... in the first place. Len Downie and the paper's other editors would undoubtedly argue that the story represents the Post's tenacity for getting to the truth, without fear or favor. But what the story actually proves is that a bunch of liars who have in the past contradicted their own current statements can, if their lies are outrageous enough and if they have enough money, control the media agenda and get even the most respected media outlets in the country to focus on picayune 'truths' while missing the larger story."

From the American Prospect:

Cowards All Around
The media should take a step back and remind us what Bush and Cheney were up to in 1969.
By Michael Tomasky
Web Exclusive: 08.23.04

Print Friendly | Email Article

At first blush, the treatment given to Michael Dobbs' page-one swift-boat article in Sunday's Washington Post seems at least vaguely reassuring. There's the neutral headline "Swift Boat Accounts Incomplete," but below that, a deck-headline informing readers that "Critics Fail to Disprove Kerry's Version of Vietnam War Episode." The banner treatment, running across three-fourths of the front page above the fold, places the onus of proof where it belongs -- on the accusers, not on Kerry, a point that Bob Novak and others have chosen to ignore, obscure, or even refute; and in announcing that the proof isn't there, it seems to be a plus for Kerry.

This is the kind of crap the Democrats are espousing. During the Nixon investigation, Ben Bradlee of the Washington Post used to call this the 'non denial denial.' Their talking points on all of the shows I have watched are to just take the James Carville approach: don't answer any questions, just shout down the host/guest and repeat the same mantra over and over. I wish that some of the hosts had balls enough to tell them to shut up!


19 posted on 08/24/2004 6:43:19 AM PDT by richardtavor (Pray for the peace of Jerusalem in the name of the G-d of Jacob)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
I'm not sure that in an era of no-cable television we would even have looked into it

With "looked into it" meaning reported it.

In today's world they have to acknowledge the story because everyone who's paying attention already knows it's out there. So they have to spin it or JF'nK will be hurt even worse

There are too many places for people to get information," O'Shea said. "I don't think newspapers can be the gatekeepers anymore -- to say this is wrong (bad for Kerry)and we will ignore it. Now we have to say this is wrong (bad for Kerry) and here is why (so we've got to spin it)."

Their biggest problem is that they're trying to suppress something that is TRUE - which is always a loosing proposition

20 posted on 08/24/2004 6:43:23 AM PDT by tx_eggman ("Beer is proof that God loves us." --Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
Oh the gaul of these primadonnas in the MSM. The editors had no problems in grappling all of the nonsense earlier this year about President Bush's guard service. They just reprinted the DNC and Micheal Moore's talking points.

Let 2004 be the beginning of the end of the MSM as we know it!
21 posted on 08/24/2004 6:43:32 AM PDT by The South Texan (The Democrat Party and the leftist (ABCCBSNBCCNN NYLATIMES)media are a criminal enterprise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
The swift boat controversy and its coverage have also provided fodder for ombudsmen during the past few days. Paul Moore at The Sun in Baltimore cited the need for reporting to include all aspects of the veterans group's activities. "News stories about this group are legitimate, but because the group's televised ads have been paid for by supporters of President Bush, the partisan nature of the material is unmistakable," he wrote.

Good Grief - partisan nature of the material? What about Soros and Moore etc.......why aren't they saying the same things about the supporters of sKerry??????

22 posted on 08/24/2004 6:46:22 AM PDT by Gabz (BTW - have I mentioned lately I'm sick and tired of rain?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
"Kerry has made his Vietnam service a centerpiece of the Democratic National Convention and the Swift Boat Veterans came out right after that," said Lee Horwich, politics editor at USA Today, which ran a story about the veterans group, and inconsistencies in its accounts, on Aug. 16.

Only trouble is, the SBVT was formed on May 4, nearly three months before the Democratic National Convention. They issued a press release and an open letter to Kerry that USA Today didn't bother to publish, and held a press conference that USA Today didn't bother to attend.

23 posted on 08/24/2004 6:46:46 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: commish
Translation, how in the hell do we cover kerry's ass, but still make it look like we are giving the Swiftee's a fair vetting.

The mainstream media can't do it anymore. The reason is simple: they no longer have monopoly control over the news, just as Alvin Toffler predicted 25 years ago in his book The Third Wave.

Between the Fox News Channel, conservative talk radio and the public Internet, the mainstream press is in big trouble.

24 posted on 08/24/2004 6:50:07 AM PDT by RayChuang88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The South Texan
Amazing. Simply Amazing.

A candidate for the POTUS who compared our war in Vietnam to that waged by "Jinjiss Khan" has run his whole campaign based on the fact that he was a decorated veteran of that war.

90% of those who served closely with him have banded together and formed a group for the sole purpose keeping him out of the White House. Which is unprecedented BTW.

And these 'tards think it's all a distraction?

Roger, WTF, out, I guess.
25 posted on 08/24/2004 6:53:01 AM PDT by Belisaurius ("Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, Ted" - Joseph Kennedy 1958)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar

Alternate Title:

How Do Newspaper Reporters And Editors Keep Shilling For Kerry Without Looking Like Partisan Hacks And Idiots?

(Don't worry; it's too late.)


26 posted on 08/24/2004 6:54:11 AM PDT by Semi Civil Servant (I spent Chanukah in the Hamptons, and Christmas in Cambodia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
Look, the Swifties are not perfect.

And if there are more than a few witnesses to any event, it's highly likely that some of the witnesses will disagree.

Kerry's "supportive" crew members have rehearsed the story they are supposed to tell. Some of them have known what they are supposed to say for many years.

Kerry's minions applied pressure to Stephen Gardner to "question" his own recollections.

Who knows what pressure/inducements have been placed on other pro-Kerry crew members.

27 posted on 08/24/2004 6:55:09 AM PDT by syriacus (Benedict Arnold REALLY was a war hero --- --- before he was a traitor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: The Old Hoosier
re: "They actually researched the allegations that he was a deserter, etc."

How true! But the difference is that they were researching those allegations in hope of proving them to be true. They put a lot more effort into researching when the results can be used to buoy their position. It's like when the death penalty opponents do a survey on death row and then announce with great fanfare that most of those on death row oppose the death penalty and feel it has no deterrent value. You see this same thing all the time in medicine. Almost every study is undertaken to support the researcher's opinion going into the study. The results are reported in such a way as to lend the most credence to their original opinion as possible. If they have only one person in their study they say "In our population it was shown without exception". If they have two people then it's "Time and again" and if they have three or more it's "Over and over".
28 posted on 08/24/2004 6:55:20 AM PDT by jwpjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar

But some of the coverage has lapsed into the "he said, she said" variety.



This suggests that reporting what different witnesses are claiming and letting the reader judge their credibility is somehow bad journalism, as if the journalist must force a conclusion onto the reader in order to do his job.


29 posted on 08/24/2004 6:55:30 AM PDT by Atlas Sneezed (Your Friendly Freeper Patent Attorney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar

Leftist journalists are truly pathetic and a bore.


30 posted on 08/24/2004 6:56:09 AM PDT by smiley (Watch out Dems! I'm a William F. Buckley Conservative!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The South Texan
Let 2004 be the beginning of the end of the MSM as we know it!

As they lose their readership, there will be a blip in the nationwide unemployment numbers, (but it will be a good indicator).

31 posted on 08/24/2004 6:57:57 AM PDT by syriacus (Benedict Arnold REALLY was a war hero --- --- before he was a traitor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone
Newspapers must just hate it that they can't suppress the news anymore.

Actually I think this more than any other thing may be the straw that ignites another Civil War in this nation.

The information genie is out of the bottle and the MSM and Dems are powerless to put it back in.

They can no longer control what American's hear through the Major Networks and the "Respected" Press (NYT, LAT, WP - GAG!). Soon the only resort they will have is repression. To do that they will have to shut down Cable news, Internet, etc -- or pass strict laws to control it.

All of that adds up to them having to physical supress "Dissent". WHEN (not if) it comes to that (and it will), the war of ideas will be taken to the street.

32 posted on 08/24/2004 6:58:19 AM PDT by commish (Freedom Tastes Sweetest to Those Who Have Fought to Preserve It)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
we still judge for ourselves which facts we report

Isn't that the definition of bias?

33 posted on 08/24/2004 6:58:35 AM PDT by P.O.E.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: syriacus

Indeed.

I would not be surprised if they were paid to say pro-Kerry stuff.

But, until there is proof of that, we can't accuse Rassman and the others.


34 posted on 08/24/2004 6:59:51 AM PDT by rwfromkansas (BYPASS FORCED WEB REGISTRATION! **** http://www.bugmenot.com ****)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
"I'm not sure that in an era of no-cable television we would even have looked into it."

Hahahahahahahaha! Oh, Alison, you are such a card! Hahahahaha!

What about the...

Hahahahaha...oh me!...hahaha...oh it hurts...hahaha...what a scream...hahahahahaha!
...about the... Hahahahaha!
...the internet?
Hahahaha! Oh, Alison. You are too much! Hahahaha!
35 posted on 08/24/2004 7:00:21 AM PDT by Savage Beast (9/11 was never repeated--thanks to President Bush! "Kerry for President!" ~Kim Jong Il)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
"I'm not sure that in an era of no-cable television we would even have looked into it," she said sniffed.

Thank God for the era of cable television and the internet.
36 posted on 08/24/2004 7:00:30 AM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
But what the story actually proves is that a bunch of liars who have in the past contradicted their own current statements can, if their lies are outrageous enough and if they have enough money, control the media agenda and get even the most respected media outlets in the country to focus on picayune 'truths' while missing the larger story."

Those picayune truths are really a pain when you're trying to tell a "larger story".

37 posted on 08/24/2004 7:02:29 AM PDT by RogueIsland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar

Josef Goebells would be very proud of his following in Americas lamestream media outlets, very proud indeed.


38 posted on 08/24/2004 7:03:00 AM PDT by jwalsh07 (Donate to the Swifties, once again serving the nation selflessly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88


Yes, "The Third Wave" has finally arrived and it sweeping the Old Media out to sea. It's about time...


39 posted on 08/24/2004 7:03:35 AM PDT by kittymyrib
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: All

My response I sent to them:



That was a pathetic apologia. Herein lies the problem:

"But what the story actually proves is that a bunch of liars who have in the past contradicted their own current statements can, if their lies are outrageous enough and if they have enough money, control the media agenda and get even the most respected media outlets in the country to focus on picayune 'truths' while missing the larger story."

Most of us Vietnam Vets don't consider his slander and traitorous acts to be picayune. The charge he makes is very revealing and I would contend applied very, very selectively. He should be looking at the Kerry's own words and sworn testimony.

The mainstream press refuses to look at Kerry's credibility. They viciously attack anyone questioning the media's favorite politician. That's how you continue to lose credibility and readership.

You folks scream "Liar" at people who try to question your mythology. Is this the death rattle of old world journalism? One can only hope.


40 posted on 08/24/2004 7:04:55 AM PDT by Stashiu ( Yeah, I am a Vietnam Vet, not a War Criminal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: commish

Translation: "How in the hell do we come off as responsible and enterprising, when facts come out that we did not report months ago when Kerry was running in the primaries and should have come under responsible press scrutiny? To report shows we did not do our job because of political slant; to not report means we are missing the big party and a chance to sell more print."


41 posted on 08/24/2004 7:05:47 AM PDT by AmericanInTokyo (Hitlery Recently Seen Throwing Banana Peels in Front of Kerry and Edwards' Residences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar

The Marxist mainstream press will do what it always does - lie, cover up and launch ad hominum attacks.

And when it's done it will claim that the stories were fair and balanced.

Then the press will pad its circulation numbers while millions of people cancel their subscriptions.


42 posted on 08/24/2004 7:06:20 AM PDT by sergeantdave (I wasn't there before I was there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar
"Alison Mitchell, deputy national editor for The New York Times (Click for QuikCap), points to the changing media landscape and its impact on what newspapers choose to cover. "I'm not sure that in an era of no-cable television we would even have looked into it," she said.

This says it all, but it was not cable news that kept this story alive but the Internet. Indeed, venues like Free Republic and others made silence on this issue impossible. Quite quickly, then, Talk Radio followed by Cable News picked up the cry and now we are at the acme of the event.

IMHO, if someone can get excerpts of "New Soldier" on the Net and on Talk Radio, they will devastate the Kerry Campaign.

43 posted on 08/24/2004 7:09:22 AM PDT by shrinkermd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ken5050

ping.... that's a worthy forecast


44 posted on 08/24/2004 7:09:25 AM PDT by pointsal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: sergeantdave

Sent to accuracy@usatoday.com:



Dear Mr. Jones,

In your role as Accuracy Editor, I would like to inform you that USA Today's politics editor was quoted in Editor and Publisher magazine as follows:

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000617053
-----
"Kerry has made his Vietnam service a centerpiece of the Democratic National Convention and the Swift Boat Veterans came out right after that," said Lee Horwich, politics editor at USA Today, which ran a story about the veterans group, and inconsistencies in its accounts, on Aug. 16.
-----

The fact is, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth was founded on May 4, 2004, nearly three months before the Democratic National Convention. They issued a press release - found on their website at http://swift1.he.net/~swiftvet/index.php?topic=Releases&page=2 (which was apparently missed by Mr. Horwich in his role as Politics Editor at USA Today), and held a press conference which was not attended by any representative of USA Today. They also issued an open letter to John Kerry on that day which was also evidently missed or ignored.

And on May 17, they issued another press release, also missed or ignored, calling on Kerry to cease the fraudulent use of the group photo when all but two of the individuals pictured there oppose his candidacy.

In short, the only reason Mr. Horwich thinks that SBVT came out right after the July 26-29 DNC is because he was either willfully or negligently failed to acknowledge the group for three months.

In short, Mr. Jones, this failing on the part of Mr. Horwich may have resulted in inaccurate statements about the group being published in USA Today. I encourage you to check out this possibility in the interests of accuracy and fairness.

-Michael Pelletier.


45 posted on 08/24/2004 7:09:50 AM PDT by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: The South Texan
Oh the gaul of these primadonnas in the MSM.

Now, now, there's no need to drag France into this....

46 posted on 08/24/2004 7:10:48 AM PDT by xjcsa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Belisaurius
And these 'tards think it's all a distraction?
Roger, WTF, out, I guess.

* bump *

47 posted on 08/24/2004 7:11:56 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: viewfromafar

I don't know why this is even a story. All the mainstream media has to do is to continue what they have been doing.... printing the dem talking points straight off their fax machines as news stories.

The problem has been over the last two weeks that the dems were caught flat footed and it took them a couple weeks to figure out what their talking points were going to be, which left the alphabet networks and newspapers floundering, not knowing how to handle it.


48 posted on 08/24/2004 7:11:59 AM PDT by Aunt Polgara
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas
would not be surprised if they were paid to say pro-Kerry stuff

I would be surprised if they were being paid.

Someone may have suggested ways in which it would be good for them to rejoin the crew.

An individual could be an "unpaid volunteer," hoping for some other type of gain which is important to him.

49 posted on 08/24/2004 7:14:09 AM PDT by syriacus (Benedict Arnold REALLY was a war hero --- --- before he was a traitor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: shrinkermd

Not just excerpts of "The New Soldier", here's the entire book :-)

===

68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub has been posting this on various threads...

The New Soldier by John Kerry and Vietnam Veterans Against the War

http://nomayo.mu.nu/archives/New%20Soldier%20Inro.pdf
http://nomayo.mu.nu/archives/New%20Soldier.pdf
http://nomayo.mu.nu/archives/New%20Soldier%20Epilogue.pdf

FREE Download of The New Soldier by John Kerry
and and Vietnam Veterans Against the War

Print and distibute the book that John Kerry "forgets" to mention!


50 posted on 08/24/2004 7:28:29 AM PDT by Tamzee (Kerry is The Meringue Candidate.... saccharine sweet stories with no actual substance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-80 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson