The piece, by the Times Public Editor, Aurthur S. Brisbane was focusing in particular on statements by Mitt Romney and how he plays loosely with the concept of what is the truth in his statements and press releases about himself and the Obama Administration, but,obviously any paper, but most especially the New York Times, has little value to society if it knowingly prints lies — or if it fails to do the minimal investigative reporting and fact-checking needed to determine if a statement by a newsmaker or, say, a global warming denier, is false.
The most pathetic aspect of this question, "Should The Times Be A Truth Vigilante?" is that Brisbane felt compelled by some psychic, un namable force to even ask it in the first place. Here we are in the second decade of the 21st century and a dweeb self appointed expert is asking us if the biggest "expert" self appointed news organization on the planet should be concernbed with the it's responsibility to report the "TRUTH". And here we are, dealing with FOX News and a multitude of editorially compromised 24 hour corporate News Outlets spewing their corporate sponsored versions of what they want us to believe? I would only direct your very limited attention span to the Clear Channel and the very direct link to their owners, Bain Capitol. You know the Romney/Bain Capitol thing...Clear Channel/Rush Limbaugh/Glenn Beck thing?
I would only like to point out that there is a 10% of the mainstream press which we can trust and count on, but they heroically put their asses on the line and get maimed, imprisoned and killed to give us the truth and I will say without any shame, that Arthur S. Brisbane has desecrated their legacy and their dedicated work just by asking his lame little question.....
2 comments:
Hello Microdot,
Good information posting. I also just read this and wanted to pass this on too.
"President Nicolas Sarkozy has fewer than 100 days before French presidential elections to overcome the blow dealt by Standard & Poor's decision to strip the country of its AAA credit rating for the first time."
My what a good job this Conservative did with his economy and the Conservatives in the U.S. want to repeat his policies?
The presidential campaign is beginning to heat up here. Hollande has morphed into a much more likable figure. He always had his intelligence and wit, but is managing to look like the man who could lead France for the next 5 years. I admire the fact that he has managed to physically transform himself from a rather geeky pudgy fellow into a lean and mean version of himself.
Sarko has been trying to coop the extreme right for the last few years to the point where he has become them, but it has only given wind to Marine LePen, who is a serious contender. She is getting lots of sympathy from the right and the left because at this stage of the electoral process, she claims she still hasn't been able to get the necessary 500 mayoral endorsements it takes to get on the ballot here. Thai is seen as the results of UMP threats to mayors in towns all across France. They are being threatened with real financial cuts if they do endorse here. If she fails to get on the ballot of course, it will cause such a huge polemic that it could seriously jeopardize the actual legitimacy of the election.
Unfortunately, her party the FN would take us back to the reactionary 1930's. Extreme Right Xenophobia, coupled with neanderthal protectionism with out the tools to actually govern. They are unabashedly fascist, where as the UMP is fascist but more along the lines of the American FOX version of soft fascism.
For most of France, the idea of another Sarkozy presidential term is unthinkable. We are simply sick of the man. He cannot govern, but he is a master manipulative lawyer. Coupled with nonstop mainstream press coverage and nonstop spin, the Socialists have a tough act to beat here. It is the old dilemma, The Left is a coalition of intellectuals and labor and what we would call progressives. It's a coalition of ideas where as the Right as usual is a unified propaganda machine always appealing to the lowest common denominator.
Post a Comment