Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
1 - I, for one, am fairly conservative, do not hate the NYT, and read it quite regularly. I am sometimes in conflict with something that has been misreported or misstated, but no more so than with many news organs today which often post opinion as much as fact in the guise of news. When I am, I will most likely refer to it as Pravda on the Hudson vice NYT; you may have seen that once or twice among my postings. However, one has to be as discriminating a reader with the NYT as with any other source of information...something I learned from my teachers in high school and continue to practice today.
|
I agree with you that all sources of information, whether persons or publications, must be taken in the context of their intentions and subjective viewpoints. I grew up around very sheltered liberals, who did nothing but mock police officers, military members, and good intentioned members of the GOP while enjoying the fruits of aforementioned groups in a well-off suburb. The New York Times' constant knee jerk, emotional stone throwing at the Bush administration, which kept us and their downtown NYC staff safe for eight hard years, is exactly the same sort of thing. I admittedly have little patience for it, so I use strong words when referring to them.
Kudos on "Pravda on the Hudson." Full disclosure, I intend to steal that with little or no attribution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
2 - The reason(s) for their circulation being down are assuredly more complex and various than what you've mentioned, although I am sure the reasons you stated are a part of that equation.
|
True, although their drop in circulation is seen in other "left of center" newspapers, such as the Washington times, suggesting that the aforementioned reasons are probably driving it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
3 - As far as the WSJ, one might make an assumption that the current economic situation has something to do with their rise in circulation because of the nearly single-minded focus of that paper and many people today vs the NYT - and despite the NYTs Paul Krugman being a very perceptive, conservative, and informative economist.
|
Point taken, I had not considered that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
4 - Remember that the NYT is read by many throughout the world and is considered to be one of the several 'voices' of America for those who care about or do business with Americans. As a concerned American, you should seek to know and understand what those 'voices' are saying...whether you agree with them or not. As a FAO in an embassy DAO, I read the NYT--among others both American and international--daily for this very reason.
|
Point taken. My stepfather gets the Times for this very reason.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
A word of advice, blanket statements often lead to verbal retaliatory blanket parties (proverbial beatings)...and I would try to avoid them if I were you.
Richard's $.02
|
I did not mean to come off as conceited being a new guy and a guest on this board. I responded with my opinion to a post in which I was not addressed directly, so I see how it could come off that way. I can assure you that is not the sort of person I am. When it comes to someone criticizing the New York Times as Team Sargent did, I feel like a fat kid when birthday cake is served. I just have to join the party.
I can also assure you that having lurked here for some time before deciding to register and post, I have read the "your rucksack is in the hall" forum, and would hate to incur the wrath of NousDefionsDoc or Team Sargent. The poor b******* they mocked are probably still in therapy. This particular one had me laughing for some time.
http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/...ad.php?t=11557
Your $.02 is worth $3 of mine on this board, and please do not take this as anything other than respectful debate.