today's NY Times' front page

[choie]

so, what does the Times have on its front page today? A long article on the extremely important, informative meeting on the administration's spying that was chaired by John Conyers yesterday? No..... they have a picture of that bastard Rove and a preview of an article inside the Times about the Repug's winter meeting. WTF???? sometimes I get so angry, I could cry.

[lisa58]

1. I know...

c-span played Rove's speech about thirty times already...

[rodeodance]

2. sigh, do they cover the hearing at all?

[Smarmie Doofus]

4. Near as I can tell.... they did NOT. n/t

[Smarmie Doofus]

3. We need to develop alternatives to corporate media.

AAR is a good start.... but needs 'refinement' to make it commercially.

We also need to support those (few) corporate outlets that haven't already been ideologically bought out. The Times is actually pretty good much of the time. It is undependable, however. Different factions pushing and pulling for dominance, me thinks.

Don't cry. But do get angry. Good stuff can come of that.

[acmejack]

5. The time is pretty good if you don't worry about the little things.

You know accuracy (WMD), timeliness (Spying they knew about pre-election), and as the OP pointed out content selection. Other than that they are wonderful! I really don't much like paying for the op-ed content either!

[Smarmie Doofus]

7. As I said: "undpendable"....

in the sense of " as a news source." And what corporate news outlets aren't? Count'em on the fingers of one hand.

Big ideological camp of cons and neocons at NYT... no question. OTOH, the op-ed material is *excellent* for the most part and far superior to that of the other so called "serious" newspapers. LTTEs are the most progressive, most literate and, overall, by far the paper's best feature.

Additionally, the coverage of the Kerry-Bush campaign was largely weighted toward Kerry. Most DEMS will recognize and acknowledge this.

The Times is a very mixed picture. Which is much more than I can say for comparable media.

It's only a dollar, weekdays. Well worth it. You can keep the Sunday edition. Six pounds in weight and five and a half of them are unadulterated trash. And what, 4$. Fer-get it.

[Popol Vuh]

11. Hi PaulHo

There's a current attempt at developing a new major alternative news media. I am not sure if you're already aware of them or not, but just in case you haven't heard of them yet, here's a few links.

I really like this idea and attempt that is IWT News.

Home Page


video 1

video 2

video 3

[Smarmie Doofus]

12. Powerful stuff. Great concept. I had NOT heard of it.

Bookmarked it and will examine the whole site tomorrow.

Thanks much.

[GrumpyGreg]

6. The poor old Times---nobody ,on either side of the fence,likes

them anymore.

[Mz Pip]

8. This must be what Tucker Carlson

is referring to when he said Bin Laden gets his talking points from the NY Times. Repugs winter meeting leads to bin Laden talking points.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[StClone]

9. Media is really going backwards

When my local radio station recently replaced the last hour of each Ed Shlutz show with Laura Ingraham then added Glenn Beck in the mourning to their simu-cast FOX TV audio, I thought things were bad.

Then CNN added Beck and J. C. Watts to their line-up. I thought of this as I see NPR wilting to the Right. John Stossels' regular 30 minutes of winger views on ABC runs a story why lying by leaders isn't bad but has an important place in history.

Where is the progress? It's as if the puppet string pullers are demanding the puppets to push the message farther, higher, longer, harder and wider to avoid turning over the whole Facist wagon.

[0007]

10. Do a LTTE

[nofoil]

13. I second that on LTTE

And remember, that at least the NYT has Krugman and Dowd. Even if we do need to (ack!) pay to read them online.