Posted on 10/11/2012 5:01:31 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Stories about Wednesday’s Congressional hearing on Libya were prominently displayed on the front pages of major newspapers throughout the United States on Thursday morning.
The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post, for example, both led with the story, meaning that editors placed it in the primary news position on their front pages.
But The New York Times was not among them. The six stories on The Times’s front page included one on affirmative action at universities, one on Lance Armstrong’s drug allegations, two related to the presidential election, one on taped phone calls at JPMorgan Chase, and one on a Tennessee woman who died of meningitis. The major artwork on Page A1 was from Syria, and the only mention of the hearing on Libya came in a one-paragraph summary at the bottom, leading readers to a well-displayed story on Page A3.
I talked with Jill Abramson, the executive editor, about the decision, which she said she may have set in motion while running the morning news meeting on Wednesday.
“I said that I wanted us to weigh the news value against the reality that Congressional hearings are not all about fact-finding,” she said. In other words, they are often deeply politicized.
Mr. Baquet, who ran the afternoon news meeting at which the decision was made, said the reasoning was simple enough: “I didn’t think there was anything significantly new in it,” he said. And, he added, “There were six better stories.”
But many readers wrote to me Thursday morning in dismay.
(Excerpt) Read more at publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com ...
... Ummmmm.... They’re biased?
Dew eye win something?
...because Odungo would have been displeased.
Everyone here knows the answer to this question.
1) "It's not Watergate"
2)"There's a Democrat President."
3)"Wouldn't want to influence the election, would we?"
Yes.....that Lance Armstrong story is huge. They even cut THE SUN CAME UP TODAY story to get that Lance Armstrong story on the front page. Here’s my take on the staff at the new York times......
hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!! Oily shills for the Democrat party.
Mr. Baquet, who ran the afternoon news meeting at which the decision was made, said the reasoning was simple enough: “I didn’t think there was anything significantly new in it,” he said. And, he added, “There were six better stories.”
I don’t mind people who think they’re smarter than me, but I despise people who think I’m dumber than they are.
There’s a difference.
You have to ask?
She should think of this as a temporary position. Very temporary.
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.