Posted on 08/28/2012 3:48:49 AM PDT by workerbee
As they head to the convention, anxious Republicans wonder, do Americans get it? Do they understand what is at stake? Will the liberal media prevail?
To which I say: not to worry! Americans are on top of the issues, and ahead of the curve. How can I be so certain? There are several data points, but let’s start with one that is especially gratifying – one that shows that the country no longer believes in the New York Times.
In a recent Pew poll, the legendary paper of record was voted less “believable” than ABC News, the Wall Street Journal, CNN, NBC news, and CBS News. What a comedown for the Grey Lady.
Not only is the paper considered less trustworthy than most others news organizations, the decline has been sharp. The average believability of the 13 news organizations reviewed was 56%; the Times came in at 49%. (The Wall Street Journal comes in at 58%, by comparison.) Whereas trust in all those outfits has dropped in recent years, the Times has fared worse than most. Since 2010, their rating has sunk from 58 to 49.
For a paper that boasts a proud heritage and certainly a devoted following among liberals, this should be worrisome. Indeed, in his “farewell column” published this past weekend, Public Editor Arthur Brisbane, essentially the paper's ombudsman, took the Times to task, saying that its “political and cultural progressivism…virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times.” He describes the paper as a “hive on Eighth Avenue…shaped by a culture of like minds” – a uni-view that he suggests is more visible from the outside than the inside. That may or may not be correct, but for sure, Americans have taken note.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
***The MSM has ruled us for 40 years at least,***
I just love that scene in DR STRANGELOVE in which they are discussing the “Doomsday Bomb”.
Russia built a bomb because the US was building a bomb, yet none of the US military personel knew of it.
Russian Ambassador: “Our source was the NEW YORK TIMES!”
Never in either yours or my life time.
Perhaps you have forgotten how they shilled for Uncle Joe Stalin back in the '30's and propped up FDR's redistributive socialism, and the political media incest that is/was the Kennedy-Sulzbergers's doing and that eventually married the Boston Globe to their fetid under-belly of the Gray Old Lady?
"All the News that Fits."
Like I said, never in either yours or my life time.
FReegards!
Correct me if I’m wrong, but weren’t 30 million people starved to death in one of the largest breadbaskets of the world, the Ukraine, during the 30’s?
And The New York Times didn’t print a word about it, even though they had reporters over there?
Just thought of it, didn’t the Times, or one of it’s reporters, get the Nobel prize, or some such, for that same time period?
Lincoln Steffens reporting from Russia for the New York Times, got the Pulitzer Prize. He was famous for coining the phrase, “I have seen the future, and it works.” to describe the Soviet Union. He was probably aware of the Ukranian famine. Steffens was a disgrace, but just about the only reporting out of the Soviet Union in those days was happy talk. It would have been difficult for countervailing ideas to get out.
It was Walter Duranty who reported for the NYT. My bad. Lincoln Steffens was that other jerk, who made the infamous, “I have seen the future...” comment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Duranty
Yes, and it was Duranty who decided to stop counting at 15 million.
If memory serves it was Duranty who coined the name, "Uncle Joe" for Stalin, with the clear intent to endear himself to the graces of his Moscow hosts in a journalistic sense even as was "Comrade" Armand Hammer was doing at the same time -- in an Occidental Petroleum industrialist's sense.
The bastardization of journalism at the New York Times has been with us for generations.
The MSM and Govt. have become synonymous with Democratic Party; Fox is centrist. For political news I go to Drudge and Free Republic.
I don’t think you need a liberal arts degree; I think you just have to toe the liberal line. A liberal arts degree is just a degree without a specific focus.
If the print media wants to survive they need to put the screws to their fellow travelers in the teachers’ unions: lib papers don’t sell in areas where lib parasites can’t even read.
Yes, similar to CNN concealing Saddam’s torture of many including one of their own employees and instead giving him favorable coverage.
A targeted boycott of only a few of the NYT’s top advertisers could put them under, or at least stir the pot. But conservatives don’t boycott much.
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.