UPDATE: Do not miss Dr. Sanity’s roundup which includes a link to this Jack Kelly piece on how Time Magazine spikes stories that are “too heroic.” Yes, it’s relevant. Also, give a read over at at The Scratching Post – CTCat is a marketer who is wondering if perhaps the NY Times IS deliberately trying to provoke the WH into making charges against them: I suggest that the NYT is hoping, praying, begging the Bush administration to take them to court. That stock price drop is no fluke. The NYT is an uncompetitive product. Unless they change consumers’ attitudes, their revenue will continue to drop.
People who see all sources of information as equally good will, in time, drop those that cost money. I no longer subscribe to any newspapers at all. I can get everything I want on the Internet for free. The NYT has to make clear it’s value proposition to the consumer. My bet is that they are positioning themselves as being the only news media large enough to uncover government scandals. They are appealing to the fear that in their absence, government agencies will run wild with corruption and deceit. The San Diego Union is currently running just such an ad campaign.
No, it wouldn’t surprise me at all to find out that the NY Times’ noble stance as “watchdog” is all about the bottom line.
END UPDATE – Scroll below for original post.
So the NY Times has, once again, been asked (by a bi-partisan group) not to report on classified information in a time of war, and they’ve refused.
I’m wondering at what point Bill Keller, whom Captain Ed correctly points out, “no one voted to put in charge of our national security” is trying to force a legal confrontation…are they actively trying to have members of the fourth estate brought up on charges of treason? To what purpose? To complete a “Bush White House is totalitarian in nature” meme that has never convincingly been built?
It won’t work. They’re not making the president look bad, here. They’re making themselves look pretty awful, though.
Well…you know, they can’t report that Hillary Clinton’s whole career is a sham, and they can’t report that the Dems are in disarray, and they won’t report that Bush’s poll numbers are going up, or that the economy is surging, or that Iraqi documents are still being translated and showing Saddam/AlQ connections…c’mon, they have to have SOMETHING to write about! Why not tell the bad guys what we’re doing? That certainly doesn’t do any harm to the NY Times’ sacred cows and kittens; it disrupts none of their concerns. Terrorism Schmerrorism, after all…if it were real and important, the god-like Bill Clinton would be talking about it, and as we know, he’s talking about Global Warming…
Seems to me that members of congress – from both parties – should be concerned about this. Seems to me an investigation of some sort might be warranted – a better one, hopefully – than the one into Sandy Berger’s pants. And Bush should come out – fighting mad, for a change – and talk to America about the (always under-reported) seriousness of the threats against us and the reckless unseriousness of the press. He should make a point that effective information-gathering tools are being systematically dismantled by the Fourth Estate, who more and more resemble a Fifth Column.
There is lots of blog-writing all over the place, all ofi t better than mine, so I’ll give you the links and let you frolic in this latest field of folly, brought to you – again and as always – by the media priesthood who have decided they answer to no-one, and that your safety, or the safety of your family members, means nothing as long as they can (they think) screw this president and his efforts.
Ed Morrissey has a superb post on this: This story is only good for one thing, and that is an attempt to blow the program and stop our ability to follow the money. The New York Times apparently wants to stage itself as a publication written by traitors for an audience of idiots.
Pajamas Barcelona editor has a round-up with quotes.
Gateway says the old grey lady can’t shut her piehole. Perhaps something needs to be stuck in it. I’m thinking a big foot, in the form of lots of appalled response.
Michelle Malkin has contact information and lots of snippets of emails already gone out – and being ignored, or course. I can’t wait for the Times’ ombudsman to write a piece next week about how really, aside from a syntax problem or two, Keller didn’t do anything wrong. Again.
Hugh Hewitt notes that the Times’ latest action comes in the same news cycle as revelations about AlQ plans against us. Or, you know, funny how it comes just when we’re actually talking seriously about WMD being found in Iraq (there’s a story the NY Times wouldn’t want to cover unless it could frame the “move on, nothing to see here, narrative”). Hewitt – an eternal optimist – also wastes his time by inviting Bill Keller to come on this radio show to talk about all of this. Keller won’t do it, of course.
Bulldog has a nice, angry post you’ll want to read:
Can anyone tell me why this program is a matter of public interest? The monitoring is done overseas, and does not involve monitoring purely domestic transactions (although I wouldn’t see the problem if it did). An outside auditor was hired to safeguard against abuses, and under International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the President had the “investigate, regulate or prohibit” foreign transactions in responding to “an unusual and extraordinary threat.”
But now, thanks to fine folks at The New York Times, yet another effective tool in the war on terror has been exposed to the enemy, despite the fact that no one can point to any legal problem with the program and that it has been effective in capturing those who would kill us.
Steven Spruiell has the site you’ll want to keep referring back to all day.
UPDATE: My follow-up piece is here.
I apologize if I seem excessively snarky – it’s unintentional. I’m still having computer problems and a health issue has suddenly snuck up on me and caught us all by surprise…code for I am feeling incredibly lousy. More later on that.