|
|
Topic started on 21-7-2008 @ 11:52 AM by bakednutz
|
NYT REJECTS MCCAIN'S EDITORIAL; SHOULD 'MIRROR' OBAMA
drudgereport.com
 An editorial written by Republican presidential hopeful McCain has been rejected by the NEW YORK TIMES -- less than a week after the paper
published an essay written by Obama, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.
The paper's decision to refuse McCain's direct rebuttal to Obama's 'My Plan for Iraq' has ignited explosive charges of media bias in top
Republican circles.
'It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece,' NYT Op-Ed editor David Shipley explained in an
email late Friday to McCain's staff. 'I'm not going to be able to accept this piece as currently written.'
(visit the link for the full news article)
Mod:edit ALL Caps Title
[edit on 7/21/2008 by JacKatMtn]
|
copyright & usage
|
Click here for more Breaking Political News topics
Hot Topics
|
Top Topics
|
This Week
|
Subscribe
|
Home
|
reply posted on 21-7-2008 @ 11:52 AM by bakednutz
|
What? Is this a joke? How bias can one be? It needs to "mirror" Obamas piece. This is crazy. MEDIA BIAS at its best!
drudgereport.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-7-2008 @ 12:13 PM by RRconservative
|
This is unbelievable....wait you said the NY Times?....well yeah I can believe it.
Don't feel bad for McCain though, he will come out smelling like a rose over this one. The NY Times on the other hand, keeps digging their own grave
over crazy stuff like this.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-7-2008 @ 12:40 PM by bakednutz
|
I dont feel bad for McCain. But the NYT trying to get him to write a whole new editorial? I like how the media tries to shape even a presidential
contenders editorial to fit their own agenda. SICK 
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 21-7-2008 @ 12:45 PM by vor78
|
Yeah, I saw this one earlier today. Its unbelievable what the media is doing this election cycle in order to get Obama elected. This is one of the
worst examples I've seen. You don't reject an editorial written by a presidential candidate, whether the style and content fit your 'standards'
of journalism or not.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-7-2008 @ 01:53 PM by Sestias
|
The Dridge Report was not very clear about what, precisely, the editor was objecting to, though it appears he wanted a more thorough discussion of
McCain's own plans in regards to Iraq, etc. It also doesn't say if Obama was asked to rewrite his op-ed before it was published. Most authors do
re-writes of their material; it shouldn't be difficult for Mc Cain.
If I were a newspaper editor, though, I would welcome input from both candidates equally.
[edit on 21-7-2008 by Sestias]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-7-2008 @ 03:06 PM by TheWayISeeIt
|
It is pretty easy to see why the editor at the NYT's is asking for a 'mirror' op-ed piece if you compare McCain's draft and the one Obama wrote
last week, namely that Obama's piece almost entirely centered around his positions and perceptions, while McCain's current draft is much more geared
towards denigrating Obama's positions.
Here is a link to Obama's piece;
www.nytimes.com...
I for one would welcome a clear stance from McCain on exactly how he plans to keep executing the war and what the benefits are of staying in Iraq
indefintely.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-7-2008 @ 03:09 PM by Johnmike
|
NYT Rejects McCain's Editorial
Woah! Didn't see this one coming!!
Oh. Yeah, we did.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-7-2008 @ 03:28 PM by GradyPhilpott
|
 
The media have already decided that Obama is God and will be elected President of the United States.
When was the last time that the major broadcast networks sent their anchors on a trip with a candidate out of the country? Not that it matters,
really, no one is watching.
The New York Times has been a joke for at least a decade and probably for much longer. They've got a good crossword puzzle, but not much else, and
certainly no credibility.
[edit on 2008/7/21 by GradyPhilpott]
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-7-2008 @ 07:21 PM by Quazga
|
Originally posted by bakednutz
What? Is this a joke? How bias can one be? It needs to "mirror" Obamas piece. This is crazy. MEDIA BIAS at its best!
drudgereport.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
Yes, it needs to mirror Obamas piece.
For example, Obama gave details of his plan.
McCain gave no details, but only attacked Obama.
They are looking for op ed pieces that can allow their readers to compare and contrast based on the same kind of article.
We do this all the time in product reviews. And we get the same response. We try to get vendors to explain to us their capabilities as defined within
certain categories, that way our readers can compare and contrast vendor products as an apples to apples comparison.
This is the same thing the NYT wants to do, but Because McCains camp doesn't actually have a plan yet, they are dithering.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 21-7-2008 @ 07:42 PM by RRconservative
|
Originally posted by Quazga
Yes, it needs to mirror Obamas piece.
For example, Obama gave details of his plan.
McCain gave no details, but only attacked Obama.
They are looking for op ed pieces that can allow their readers to compare and contrast based on the same kind of article.
We do this all the time in product reviews. And we get the same response. We try to get vendors to explain to us their capabilities as defined within
certain categories, that way our readers can compare and contrast vendor products as an apples to apples comparison.
This is the same thing the NYT wants to do, but Because McCains camp doesn't actually have a plan yet, they are dithering.
So what you are saying is if McCain came out with his op-ed first, they would have turned down Obama's because it didn't miror McCain's?
That would have never happened. Obama could call the NY Times right now and demand a whole page add and pay hardly anything for it. They did it for
Move-on.org and the anti-Petraeous ad, so why wouldn't they do it for Obama?
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-7-2008 @ 09:56 PM by Quazga
|
Originally posted by RRconservative
Originally posted by Quazga
Yes, it needs to mirror Obamas piece.
For example, Obama gave details of his plan.
McCain gave no details, but only attacked Obama.
They are looking for op ed pieces that can allow their readers to compare and contrast based on the same kind of article.
We do this all the time in product reviews. And we get the same response. We try to get vendors to explain to us their capabilities as defined within
certain categories, that way our readers can compare and contrast vendor products as an apples to apples comparison.
This is the same thing the NYT wants to do, but Because McCains camp doesn't actually have a plan yet, they are dithering.
So what you are saying is if McCain came out with his op-ed first, they would have turned down Obama's because it didn't miror McCain's?
That would have never happened. Obama could call the NY Times right now and demand a whole page add and pay hardly anything for it. They did it for
Move-on.org and the anti-Petraeous ad, so why wouldn't they do it for Obama?
No, I'm saying they asked both candidates for details of their plans, and even let the McCain Camp go second as a rebuttal, but only the Obama camp
ended up playin ball.
Probably because McCain/s advisers hadn't anything to say in rebuttal.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 22-7-2008 @ 09:59 AM by Dronetek
|
No, I'm saying they asked both candidates for details of their plans, and even let the McCain Camp go second as a rebuttal, but only the Obama
camp ended up playin ball.
Probably because McCain/s advisers hadn't anything to say in rebuttal.
Just because you don't agree with his rebuttal, doesn't mean there isn't one. I'm amazed at the sheer denseness of some of you, including the NYT
editor. You may not agree with McCain's point of view, but that's what an OP Ed is!
Its truly amazing watching you guys rationalize the silencing of opinions you don't agree with. It seems to be a common theme of the left in this
country.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |