Busted! Lawrence Eagleburger outs the New York Times

Fox News - Hannity and Colmes | 4-02-03

[jmstein7]

Busted! Lawrence Eagleburger outs the New York Times

On Fox News Channel’s hit debate show “Hannity and Colmes”, former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger inarguably exposed the anti-Bush bias of the New York Times for all to see. Secretary Eagleburger recounted how he was approached by the Times to write an op-ed piece. The Times told him, explicitly, to be critical of the administration.

This is an indisputable example of how the Times bends the news and its editorials to forward its radical left-wing agenda.

[patriciaruth]

You are being logical.

That is why you miss what I would have missed, but my husband picked up on.

The lib propagandists do not play to logic, they play to visual impact and emotion.

Most people who glance at a newspaper photo do not analyze it logically. They have a visual, emotional, gut reaction to it. The libs and commies know all about that and they know that most people are not logical.

[rwfromkansas]

A newspaper does not have to have balance in the opinions page. But, it is pretty interesting when they instruct someone on what exactly to write.

[jmstein7]

Apparently, they TOLD him what his opinion had to be.

[Kevin Curry]

Do you ninnies even understand what an Op/Ed page is?

Apparently the NYT version is, it's the page where guests write editorials that express the opinions mandated by the editor.

[Ole Okie]

I think he just said he was approached by the New York Times.

[meema]

Good program tonight. I loved the way Eagleburger outed the nyt/slimes on their request for a negative on GW op/ed piece! Even Colmes sounded like a patriot!

[meema]

I didn't hear him name names, wish he had!

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

Secretary Eagleburger recounted how he was approached by the Times to write an op-ed piece. The Times told him, explicitly, to be critical of the administration.

Apparently, you are unaware of what type of writing normally populates the Op-Ed pages of newspapers.

Opinion and Editorials.

I would sit up and take notice if Eagleburger revealed that he was hired to write a news story on the what the President eats for breakfast and was given explicit instructions to be critical of the Administration. There's a difference. This is a non-story.

[Faraday]

This is a non-story.

Not so. If they request a piece from an author of a particular background and with particular expertise, and then demand a certain slant in order to publish the result, that is extremely disingenuous. They can always express their opinion in the editorials. This is clearly aimed at trying to generate a "split" among conservative Republicans of the Reagan and Bush administrations. Remember they did this last fall with Baker, and some others, around the UN strategy. It appears they are trying to generate division again--and this in a time of war. That is news.

[clamboat]

Apparently the NYT version is, it's the page where guests write editorials that express the opinions mandated by the editor.

Well DUUUUH! No Kidding?!? You mean the editors and the publisher get to DECIDE what to put on the OP/Ed page of their newpaper? Who thought up that bright idea?

It is bad enough that jmstein7 to posts a dumb article. It is even worse that such a virtual mob starts feeding on such a trivial observation that opinion pages might be <gasp>...opinonated.

[jmstein7]

It's not about PRINTING what they want to print; it's about MANDATING what should be written.

[StopGlobalWhining]

I was watching this on my Tivo, and backed up and looked at the "before and after" video along with the front page (before/after) of the LA Times.

It was very obvious that the modified version of the photo was definitely and purposely modified to make the American soldier look bad.

Please don't attempt to infer that American soldiers are terrorizing Iraq civilians. You're in the wrong place for that.

[Homer1]

It's not like they asked eagleburger to write HIS opinion.

They asked eagleburger to write a piece re-iterating THEIR opinion.

IOW, the NYT op-ed page is only interested in opinions critical of Bush. We pretty much knew that, but here's more proof.

[GailA]

He should of said handing out food AFTER they raked off a percentage of the money to line their own pockets. Or weren't inticing people into the sex trade serfdom.

[PhiKapMom]

That's for sure! UN is totally worthless IMHO!