NYT Rejects McCain's Editorial; Should 'Mirror' Obama

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]

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)

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.

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

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.

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]

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.

NYT Rejects McCain's Editorial

Woah! Didn't see this one coming!!


Oh. Yeah, we did.

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]

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.

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?

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.

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.