« Kissing, A (Relatively) Recent Invention? |
Main
|
Tennessee Judge: Illegals Immigrants Have No Rights Here »
September 12, 2007
NYT Gave MoveOn.Org a 61% Discount on "General BetrayUs" Ad
Working hand in glove with the left, while claiming to be a disinterested apolitical news service:
Jake Tapper at ABC News reported that MoveOn.org paid $65,000 for its full page anti-war advocacy sliming of General David Petraeus. This figure raised the suspicions of attentive blogger Confederate Yankee whose intuition appears to be correct. (h/t Michelle Malkin) While looking up the current New York Times rate book he discovered that MoveOn.org received a $102,000 discount on the standard political advocacy rate that is advertised at $167,157.
For a newspaper that pretends to be objective purveyors of news this discount seems a bit steep for the deep pocketed liberal advocacy group. In fact the amount MoveOn paid is less than any rate listed in the New York Times schedule.
I wonder if Freedom Watch can get a similar discount?
This is doubly harmful for the company, of course. Not only are they deliberately reducing the value of their brand, they're giving up money from their crippled advertising revenues to do so.
As I've often said of Pinch Sulzberger and other leftwing media-types: The job you're looking for, where you can agitate honorably and honestly for your political preferences, is in the DNC. By posing as a news service while so transparently acting as an owned-and-operated franchise of the Democratic Party, you are attempting to dishonestly leverage your false "independence" and "objectivity" to give DNC press releases a sheen of impartiality they otherwise would not have.
The media claims to be in the business of truth, but their entire empire rests upon a foundational lie, which they simply will not admit. Virtually every player in the MSM begins its reportage to the public with a flat-out lie: That they are politically disinterested and do not push one party over the other.
If the first words from their lips are lies, why should a goddamn thing they say next be believed?
Question: Should the New York Times be charged with an in-kind donation to MoveOn.org? Shouldn't it have to declare it made a $102,000 donation to a political group?