Is this turning you on?
Posted on 09/16/2008 11:14:41 AM PDT by curth
NY Post jumps gun to endorse McCain
The newspaper waited until October to endorse Bush in 2000 and 2004. Some say its September endorsement of presidential hopeful John McCain is just a marketing ploy.
Breaking with newspaper tradition—and its own past practices—the New York Post endorsed Sen. John McCain for president on Monday, becoming the first major newspaper to enter the editorial sweepstakes that are a traditional part of the campaign season.
Most editorial pages still adhere to the tradition of hearing out the candidates during the period after Labor Day, when the general public is believed to start giving the campaigns its full attention.
The Post’s Sept. 8 editorial came roughly six weeks prior to the usual time for endorsements. In 2000, the News Corp.-owned paper endorsed George W. Bush for president on October 23. In 2004, it endorsed the president for re-election on Oct. 22.
Monday’s endorsement, which was heralded on the Post’s front page and appeared in the paper’s news hole on page 5, raised some eyebrows among newspaper experts, and not only because it wasn’t relegated to the editorial page.
“It seems that a newspaper would want to wait to hear what happens in the debates, and to continue to cover the campaign to find out what else [about the candidates] comes out,” said Tom Huang, an assistant managing editor at the Dallas Morning News who is an ethics fellow at the Poynter Institute, a school for journalists. “This potentially creates the perception that the Post will not be able to cover the campaign in a fair and balanced way.”
A spokesman for the Post declined to comment on the paper’s decision.
Other observers noted that the Post’s point of view is no mystery. Most readers assume that the conservative tabloid will support the Republican candidate, just as most readers can assume that the New York Times will endorse Sen. Barack Obama.
The Post, they say, is simply breaking with an outdated tradition.
“The Post, like Fox News, has made a place for itself by deciding that the old rules of the objectivity game are out of date, and readers or viewers want a stronger point of view,” said Evan Kornog, publisher of the Columbia Journalism Review.
Going out so early with an endorsement may also be shrewd marketing. Though it may not convince any voters to change allegiances, the paper gets to stand out from the pack—which helps the Post, if not necessarily the candidate.
“The chances are that McCain will use the endorsement in his campaign material, which adds an aura of prestige to the Post,” said consultant Gerry O’Brien, who was New York State political director for the McCain presidential campaign in 2000. “Everybody’s trying to sell newspapers.
Evan Korndog? Columbia? What would Evan Korndog have said if the Post endorsed Obama?? Let me guess.
Big deal. I can tell you who the New York Times will endorse as soon as the Dems nominate their candidate. I bet the Times endorses the Democrat is each of the next few presidential elections.
No bets after that, they may be out of business.
Big deal. I can tell you who the New York Times will endorse as soon as the Dems nominate their candidate. I bet the Times endorses the Democrat is each of the next few presidential elections.
No bets after that, they may be out of business.
It doesn’t necessarily help the candidate????
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Because the Post didn’t endorse their messiah.
It’s as if these rags think they’re appearing unbiased unless they put a formal endorsement on the op/ed page.
Maybe Obama is such a bad candidate it’s easy to tell months out.
If Obama had undergone one tenth the scrutiny Palin had, he would be laughed out of the campaign.
They are criticizing Palin for having a tanning bed, for goodness sake. Obama got his political start from an unrepentant terrorist. Two months after he gets his position, the legislature funnels money to the hospital his wife works out. They then give her a huge raise.
The presss is not interested.
Oh yeah, I'm sure the New York Times and the Washington Post are seriously deliberating which candidate they should champion somewhere down the road...
You’d hate to see anyone break with the non-partisan, fair-minded, objective example set by the New York Times.
Oh for Godsakes!
How old is Korndog? A hundred and fifty?!?
The New York Times is steadfastly adhering to their tradition of objectivity in the same way that I'm sticking to my tradition of being a 18th century Japanese schoolgirl.
Is this turning you on?
What could Obama say during the debates that would make him remotely acceptable? “I am not a Socialist”?
Like anybody would believe him!
I suppose the New York Times, the Associated Press, Time, etc., are the picture of objectivity.
I don’t think the Post has anything to worry about. By November many of its rivals will be out of business so who cares what they have to say?
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.