Media Bias Without Saying a Word?
Can the media exhibit bias by not even saying one word? Sure! In a blast from the past here is a link to my very first "real" post after the introductory one. It was called "Silence is a Powerful Tool". The media uses tricks like determining something is not newsworthy. I have a feeling that if they setup a website called unnewsworthy.com and placed all the stories they buried under this guise, it would be quite a popular site. While the media is covering the antics and drama of Norman Hsu, they are being quite silent on the money trail. They are displaying a typical lack of curiosity for facts that are likely damaging to Democratic candidates. Remember all of the digging the media did on the money trail of lobbyist Jack Abramoff? Well, the blogs had to do most of the covering of the involvement of Democrats with Abramoff, but the media went after the GOP-Abramoff money trail like a hound dog on the scent.
A few days ago, Newsbusters.org had another interesting story where media can show bias while being silent. The New York Times like any other paper charges advertisers money for taking out ads. Terry Trippany of Newbusters gives us a link to what a full page political ad would cost and a link to a news story showing what Moveon.oink actually paid for the ad. Instead of the normal charge of $167,157 for the full page ad to charge an honorable General with betraying his country, the New York Times only charged Moveon $65,000 for a discount of over $102,000.
I did see that there were ways of getting some discounted rates such as buying multiple ads. Perhaps they have some kind of frequent advertisers discount, but that is still a hefty discount. I look forward to seeing some kind of explanation, but so far after waiting a few days I have not seen one. If indeed the Grey Lady provided an under the table deal for an ideological friend, it would be yet another example of how powerful silent bias can be.
Update:
Uncle Jimbo files a complaint with the FEC over NYT hefty discount for MoveOn.Oink
Update II:
Rudy Giuliani is demanding the NYT give him the same discount rate for a full page political ad he wants to run
A few days ago, Newsbusters.org had another interesting story where media can show bias while being silent. The New York Times like any other paper charges advertisers money for taking out ads. Terry Trippany of Newbusters gives us a link to what a full page political ad would cost and a link to a news story showing what Moveon.oink actually paid for the ad. Instead of the normal charge of $167,157 for the full page ad to charge an honorable General with betraying his country, the New York Times only charged Moveon $65,000 for a discount of over $102,000.
I did see that there were ways of getting some discounted rates such as buying multiple ads. Perhaps they have some kind of frequent advertisers discount, but that is still a hefty discount. I look forward to seeing some kind of explanation, but so far after waiting a few days I have not seen one. If indeed the Grey Lady provided an under the table deal for an ideological friend, it would be yet another example of how powerful silent bias can be.
Update:
Uncle Jimbo files a complaint with the FEC over NYT hefty discount for MoveOn.Oink
Update II:
Rudy Giuliani is demanding the NYT give him the same discount rate for a full page political ad he wants to run
Labels: Hillary Clinton, New York Times, Norman Hsu, Silent Bias
3 Comments:
At 9:28 PM, SkyePuppy said…
I hope the NY Times gets hammered. What a bunch of partisan hacks!
At 11:46 PM, All_I_Can_Stands said…
If they do not get hammered legally, their credibility and stock will.
At 1:33 AM, Justin L. Brown said…
There exists a little class of substances termed "primordial." These require no evidence of presence outside of themselves. Time and space are great cases. Vacant space would exist regardless of the fact that nothing else did. We don't need to clarify it. We don't need to demonstrate it. It essentially is. Word of logic
Post a Comment
<< Home