← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · PENN

Thread 5165

Thread ID: 5165 | Posts: 8 | Started: 2003-02-22

Wayback Archive

PENN [OP]

2003-02-22 16:06 | User Profile

"I have spent pretty much all of my working life in the newspaper business and, to borrow a suspect self-exculpation, some of my best friends work at the Times, but as much as I find the daily appearance of this publication vital to my psychic well-being (particularly the crossword puzzle), I have always felt a bit of an inherited chill about the institution of the Times. It was never my family.

But, of course, The New York Times is a family, one of the most powerfully dynastic in American history, up there with the Cabots and Lodges, Rockefellers and Kennedys. The Ochses and Sulzbergers have owned the Times enterprise, now a multi-billion dollar operation, for more than a hundred years, and in all that time the family has maintained day-to-day control of this most prestigious of all daily newspapers."

[...]

[url=http://www.jrep.com/Books/Article-68.html]http://www.jrep.com/Books/Article-68.html[/url]

PENN

2003-03-24 10:03 | User Profile

"At every stage, he seemed to imply, he was running up against the NY Times hierarchy. It wasn’t he who objected, I gathered, so much as a procession of sacerdotal figures, each in his or her glass box, each with his or her name on the masthead, sitting in judgment over correctness and style. There was nothing he would have liked more, he seemed to say, than to accede to my vulgar, unpasteurised British journalism. But the longer our conversation went on, the more I felt like that professor in the Philip Roth novel, the one who gets sacked for using the word ‘spooks’, and who was thought, mistakenly, to have been referring to blacks. "

[...]

[url=http://www.spectator.co.uk/article.php3?table=oldßion=current&issue=2003-03-22&id=2907]http://www.spectator.co.uk/article.php3?ta...3-03-22&id=2907[/url]

This article is nothing but a Brit puff piece, a judeo-softball:

"‘OK, Booris, I’ll tell you what the problem is. Our problem is that “Gee” is an abbreviation for Jesus. For a century this has been a Jewish-owned paper, and we have to be extremely sensitive about anything that might offend Christian sensibilities. "

PENN

2003-03-24 12:29 | User Profile

"Some days you pick up the newspaper and you don’t know whether to laugh or cry,’ writes Thomas Friedman of the New York Times. Actually, I haven’t been shedding too many crocodile tears lately, until, that is, a Sam Schulman column reached me via the miracle of the post. Talk about bursting out laughing. Schulman is an American friend of mine whom I once entrusted with running a section of the New York Press, Taki’s Top Drawer, now mercifully extinct. Schulman’s thesis in a jiffy: anyone who is anti-war is objectively if not intentionally helping to bring about genocide of the Jews. He writes of ‘complicitous pacifists’, and counts Jews among their number. "

[...]

[url=http://www.lewrockwell.com/spectator/spec45.html]http://www.lewrockwell.com/spectator/spec45.html[/url]

PENN

2003-03-30 09:38 | User Profile

"It’s official: as Director of NumbersUSA’s Media Standards Project, I can reveal that The New York Times is one of the nominees for my Most Intellectually Dishonest Newspaper In America Award. (Competition is fierce!)

The Times spins half-truths, omissions and factual errors into editorials and stories that support its fantasy interpretation of the National Question. Not even the supermarket rag The Globe can match the Times for distortion."

[...]

[url=http://www.vdare.com/guzzardi/big_lie.htm]http://www.vdare.com/guzzardi/big_lie.htm[/url]

Faust

2003-03-30 21:22 | User Profile

PENN,

A great Vdare.com article!

PENN

2003-05-10 09:32 | User Profile

"The New York Times refused to review William McGowan´s blockbuster book, [url=http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1893554287/toogoodreports]Coloring the News: How Crusading for Diversity Has Corrupted American Journalism (Encounter Books, 2001). [/url]New York Times Book Review editor Chip McGrath said it would not be appropriate for the Times to review a book that was so critical of the Times. But such a review might have alerted Times chairman Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., and his editors, who vigorously promote "diversity" in the news business, to a well-documented expose of the corruption that quite possibly led to the Jayson Blair scandal. Blair, a reporter who came to the Times on a minority fellowship, recently resigned after being caught stealing material from another journalist, Macarena Hernandez of the San Antonio Express-News. Ironically, they had both been interns at the Times in 1998.

Prompted by a complaint from San Antonio-Express-News editor Robert Rivard, the scandal became public and led to revelations that 50 corrections had been run on Blair´s stories dating back to when he joined he paper in 1999, and that he had been warned by his editors to be more accurate. Some of the corrections were substantial, involving major national stories such as the Beltway sniper shootings case. Times executive editor Howell Raines has now assigned a team of editors and reporters to examine Blair´s past writings.

Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz has already uncovered several more questionable Blair stories that include fabricated or stolen material. He said it appears the story that prompted the resignation was just part of a "pattern" in which Blair "repeatedly fabricated material for Times stories."

[...]

[url=http://toogoodreports.com/column/general/kincaid/20030511-fss.htm]http://toogoodreports.com/column/general/k...0030511-fss.htm[/url]

PENN

2003-06-12 19:20 | User Profile

"Amid a devastating reporting scandal in the wake of which two top editors have resigned, the New York Times faces the possible loss of its 1932 Pulitzer Prize.

Times reporter Walter Duranty won the award more than 70 years ago for his reporting on the Soviet Union under Josef Stalin's communist regime. But several Ukranian-American groups, as part of their commemoration of the 70th anniversary of the Ukranian Famine, are asking the Pulitzer board to revoke Duranty's award, arguing that the correspondent's sympathy for Stalin caused Duranty to ignore millions of deaths.

Indeed, the Pulitzer board is considering doing just that, reports the New York Sun. In April, the committee launched a review of Duranty's work.

Malcolm Muggeridge, the celebrated author and journalist, was one of the few able to get into the famine-ravaged lands of the U.S.S.R. and report on what he saw during that era. Later, Muggeridge described Duranty as "the greatest liar of any journalist I have met in 50 years of journalism."

Critics have long said that because of Duranty's manipulation of the news to placate Soviet authorities – especially Stalin – the scope of horror wrought by the communists in the pre-war U.S.S.R. was not fully comprehended until many years later. As a result, the public could not really gauge what communism was capable of, and what kind of man Stalin actually was. Robert Conquest's book "Harvest of Sorrow" and B.J. Taylor's "Stalin's Apologist" dissect Duranty's alleged journalistic misdeeds. "

[...]

[url=http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33013]http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=33013[/url]

PENN

2003-08-11 18:11 | User Profile

"Within a few years, I understood that I should have described Newton and his cadres as psychopathic criminals, not social reformers. By now, a torrent of articles and books, many written by former sympathizers, has voluminously documented the Panther reign of murder and larceny within their own community. So much so that no one but a left wing crank could still believe in the Panther myth of dedicated young blacks “serving the people” while heroically defending themselves against unprovoked attacks by the racist police.

Except, that is, at the New York Times. Despite the mea culpas by publisher Arthur Sulzberger and executive editor Howell Raines over the Jayson Blair affair, the paper’s obsession with white guilt and black victimhood apparently still trumps every standard of journalistic and historical accuracy.

Where else but in Sulzberger’s and Raines’s Times could a review (registration required) of an exhibit of photographs of the Black Panthers turn into a political lecture by a white art critic on the justice of black violence? In Sunday’s “Arts and Leisure” section, art commentator Holland Cotter instructs us that the advances promised by the plodding mainstream civil rights movement led by Martin Luther King Jr. could only have been regarded as chump change by an intelligent young black like Huey Newton, living in a place like Oakland, California. "

[...]

[url=http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon_5_27_03ss.html]http://www.city-journal.org/html/eon_5_27_03ss.html[/url]