thereby demonstrating their complete lack of objectivity - not that anyone seriously thought the NYT had any to begin with.
2007-09-24 01:37:12 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
When did I say the government should regulate it?
All I'm saying is that nobody can seriously argue that the NYT is just "the news" - it's a Leftist rag.
2007-09-24 01:47:06 · update #1
Westhill come on you're smarter than that, some 25 year old intern isn't making deals on full page ads.....
You're demonstrating your own lack of objectivity with that one.
2007-09-24 02:25:32 · update #2
The scoop was that the New York Times refused an ad by the republicans for full price (noted at $163,000) and placed the Petraeus ad for $60,000.
They offered to pay full price and were asked to accept the largely lowered ad price.
Sweet.
2007-09-24 02:11:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
first of all, it was not only 1/3rd of the price, secondly, when Rudy Giuliani put in an add complaining about it, he also got that rate, and now a group complaining about the Iranian president is also getting the rate. The discounted rate is available to anybody, they can not guarantee the exact day it will run. You tell them when you want the add in, and they try their best to do it, but with the rate it might not make it into the specific day you asked for.. Move on got theirs on the day they wanted, and so did Rudy, and so did this new group that is afraid of free speech.
You must get your news from Fox news and Rush Limbaugh
2007-09-24 09:14:47 · answer #2 · answered by Michael G 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It shows that the MoveOn employee who negotiated the rate was a good bargainer, and that the NYT salesman was a poor rep for his company. MoveOn really wanted the ad to run right after Petraeus' testimony, it's early in the election season and MoveOn is flush with cash, so the salesman could have easily gotten the usual rate.
2007-09-24 08:53:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
For years, we've heard how the government should stay out of business. Now suddenly cons are pro-regulation. Let's get this straight poisonous toys are OK but anti-war Ads are just going too far. Spare us your righteous indignation.
2007-09-24 08:46:05 · answer #4 · answered by Holy Cow! 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
That's the main problem with the newspaper itself, the main problem with the ad is that it was prepared long before The good General ever spoke, poised and ready to call him a liar. No facts needed, Way to go lefties...
2007-09-24 08:50:25 · answer #5 · answered by Erinyes 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I thought the problem was the ad itself. Instead of condemning the mesa age, you are condemning the messenger.
2007-09-24 08:51:26 · answer #6 · answered by fangtaiyang 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
God Bless Discounts!
Moveon.org, is one of the few honest web sites there are.
2007-09-24 08:58:55 · answer #7 · answered by Darth Vader 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
But it is a discount to a loyal friend.
2007-09-24 08:44:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋