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

Skip to comments.

Steiger, Downie Refused to Join Keller/Baquet Op-Ed (WSJ & WaPo Decline to Defend NYT/LAT Treason)
Editor & Publisher ^ | July 7, 2006 | Joe Strupp

Posted on 07/06/2006 12:16:17 PM PDT by RWR8189

NEW YORK Managing Editor Paul Steiger of The Wall Street Journal and Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr. of The Washington Post were both asked to be part of last weekend's unique joint Op-Ed piece by the editors of The New York Times and Los Angeles Times, which defended the publication of stories about the secret SWIFT bank monitoring program, E&P has learned. But each declined.

"We had talked about doing something together," Steiger said. "But when I looked at it and thought about it, our position was so different from theirs -- that nobody asked us not to publish [our story] -- it was a totally different case."

Steiger referred to the U.S. Treasury Department's request to the New York Times and Los Angeles Times, prior to the stories that first appeared on their Web sites on June 22, not to reveal elements of the secret program. Although the Journal posted its story at virtually the same time, it was never asked to withhold publication.

Negative feedback prompted New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller and Los Angeles Times Editor Dean Baquet to write a joint Op-Ed defending their decisions to publish the stories. The Op-Ed piece ran in both the New York and Los Angeles papers on Saturday.

Steiger said he was approached to be part of the Op-Ed last week, but declined to say who made the request or exactly when. "I don't want to go into details," he said. "We talked about it and I decided it did not work. I considered it and I decided not to go in because our position was different from theirs."

He said his choice to decline was not affected by a harsh Journal editorial that ran last Friday and criticized the New York Times for publishing the story -- even though the Journal published much the same story. Steiger declined to comment on the editorial, but stressed that the lack of a government request not to publish was a major difference between the two papers' actions. "It is a big difference if the government asks you not to publish, I would consider that very carefully." When asked if a government request to hold the story would have blocked publication, Steiger said, "I don't know how I would have acted."

Downie said he was approached to add his name to the Baquet/Keller piece sometime last week, but did not want to be part of something that involved other newspapers. "I was contacted by Bill [Keller] and I decided not to participate in a group," Downie told E&P Wednesday. "I was asked if I was interested in being involved with several editors about this and I declined. I think one of the important things about American journalism is that each newspaper operates on its own and I didn't want to join in a group situation. We are independent."

Downie said the Post, like the other three papers, first posted the story on its Web site on June 22, but well after the others. He said it did not make the print version until the second edition on June 23. He declined to comment on the Op-Ed that ran or on the other papers' decisions to publish in the face of government requests against it.

"We published the story we published, nobody contacted us about publishing it," he said. On the Op-Ed, he added, "since I didn't join in, I wouldn't have any opinion on it."

Keller and Baquet did not return several calls seeking comment.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California; US: District of Columbia; US: New York; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: baquet; billkeller; california; classified; deanbaquet; districtofcolumbia; downie; journal; keller; latimes; leonarddownie; losangelestimes; newyork; newyorktimes; nytimes; partisanmediashill; partisanmediashills; paulsteiger; post; steiger; terrorfinance; wapo; washingtonpost; wsj

1 posted on 07/06/2006 12:16:21 PM PDT by RWR8189
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

later read


2 posted on 07/06/2006 12:24:31 PM PDT by Mo1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePb6H-j51xE&search=Democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

They can read the writing on the wall. They know that the Slimes is in hot water with the American people. They're not going to risk further declines in their circulation.


3 posted on 07/06/2006 12:28:28 PM PDT by blitzgig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

Let the Times sink in its own mud.


4 posted on 07/06/2006 1:57:54 PM PDT by Hartmann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

The New York What???


5 posted on 07/06/2006 1:59:28 PM PDT by Barney59 ("Loose Lips Sink Ships")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189; Mia T; george76; abb; Milhous; Liz; petercooper; weegee; devolve; pissant; PhilDragoo
INSTRUCTIONS FROM Grampa Dave:

 

Want to smash the NY Slimes?
Check your mutual funds to see if they own NYT, the NY Slimes Stock

 

 

How many of us own mutual funds which own NY Slimes stock and even worse have increased their NYT holdings this year.

NYT investment by a mutual fund company is a terrible investment re the dollar loss in Stock value the last 2 years. Those investments are an attempt to keep the NY Slimes afloat with our mutual fund $'s.

Now it is very evident that the NY Slimes is an agent and abettor of the al Qaeda Serial Killers. The Slimes is endangering the lives of our families, friends, innocent Americans and every warrior of ours.

Go to this link to see if your mutual fund owns NYT.

http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/invsub/ownership/ownership.asp

When the MS Money stock home page comes up, enter NYT into the search area and hit enter and the following screen will show up re ownership of the NY Slimes stock:

The New York Times Company: Ownership Information

  • Shares Outstanding 145.00 Mil

  • Institutional Ownership (%) 83.40

  • Top 10 Institutions (%) 58.60

  • Mutual Fund Ownership (%) 42.64

  • 5%/Insider Ownership (%) 7.77

  • Float (%)

Highlight the Mutual Fund Ownership and hit enter.

If thousands of Freepers, whose mutual funds own shares of NY Slimes did the following:

  1. Sell those mutual funds or trade them for funds not owning NYT.

  2. Send a letter to the fund managers and the CEO's of the mutual fund company telling them why you sold/transferred their mutual fund owning NY Slimes stock. Then demand to know why they are wasting your precious $'s on a treason/sedition company which is a terrible investment.

  3. Contact the SEC to investigate why this mutual fund and mutual fund company invested your $'s in one of the worse investments of the past 2 years. Was the investment of yours and others a political bailout of the NY Slimes.

  4. Send this how to re Mutual Funds with NYT stock to everyone on your email list for a wakeup call.

We might have a lot more impact than trying to boycott companies which sell to the elite liberals of NYC and advertise in the NY Slimes.



6 posted on 07/07/2006 8:14:58 AM PDT by Grampa Dave (There's a dwindling market for Marxist Homosexual Lunatic Lies posing as journalism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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