Credibility Gap at the Times

Here's a link to an article set to appear in The New York Times, Sunday, May 10, 2009. according to the Times' web page on Saturday, May 9.



I draw your attention to this particular piece primarily because The Times Web Site announced that the article would appear in the Sunday Times on page A1. The announcement makes no mention of whether it will appear above or below the fold.



When you read it please pay attention to whether you consider its content to be news or opinion.



If it's opinion it has no place being on page A1, whether above or below the fold. And if it's place is on the editorial page or the Op-Ed page, the Times' editors should come clean on to whom it attributes the opinion it clearly endorses.



Recently, a Times' reporter received a Pulitzer for exposing the cozy relationship between the Pentagon and some retired military officers. It's apparent that the powers that be, at that time, bought and paid for the officers' willingness to appear as our military patriots in support of what most of us have come to wonder was worth the sacrifice of lives and fortune. They tried to equate the situation with the reality of WWII.

These officers were shills for the Pentagon and the Bush administration. They were paid to spin the news and to spread the Bush propaganda.

The Times didn't even mention that their own employee won the Pulitzer for his uncovering of this sham.

Leanderthal