Can the NY Times run a disclaimer informing their readers that they're sucking the right wing's collective cock? Fucking honestly, why are they running a story about right wing bloggers accusing the Associated Press of being in bed with the terrorists? Why is this considered news? And if they have to run a story on it, can they at least get their facts straight?

For example, here's the caption they gave to this photo:

Some conservative bloggers contend The Associated Press was complicit in taking this photograph of the slaying of an Iraqi election worker. The A.P. strongly denies that.

What's wrong here? Well, let me make a couple corrections. First: "Some conservative bloggers contend" WITHOUT ANY PROOF WHATSOEVER. Second: "The A.P. strongly denies that" BY PROVIDING INFORMATION ABOUT HOW THE PHOTO WAS TAKEN, WHICH THE RIGHT WING BLOGGERS HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO DEBUNK.

Oh, I'm sorry, if they made those corrections then the Times wouldn't have had a story.

Yet the rabid dickheads at Power Line and elsewhere will still claim that this is an example of the "liberal media." I guess for the right wants to NY Times to swallow before granting them their approval.

...Salon has more.

Originaly posted by Tas on April 12th, 2005

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.grupo-utopia.com/blog/mt/mt-tb.cgi/23

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Dear New York Times: Fuck you:

» No more blogs from Elenamary - de aquí y de allá
Is it wrong to complain about blogs on a blog? Arianna Huffington (whom I adore) as a new blog The Huffington Post. Is it really a blog though? If it is a blog is Salon a blog? What is the... [Read More]

Tracked on May 10, 2005 08:07 AM