Thursday, October 28, 2004
The difference a different NY Times editor (sort of) makes.
If Howell Raines, who not so long ago as editor of the NY Times proclaimed...
Our greatest accomplishment as a profession is the development since World War II of a news reporting craft that is truly non-partisan ... It is an exercise in disinformation, of alarming proportions, this attempt to convince the audience of the world's most ideology-free newspapers that they're being subjected to agenda-driven news reflecting a liberal bias... (as earlier noted)... and who recently in the Washingpost Post , in his own "truly non-partisan" and unbiased way, wrote ...
These are signs of the fierce conviction of some voters -- and the secret fear of a quieter and perhaps larger group -- that George W. Bush is not smart enough to continue as president ... Yet the subject is seldom taken head-on by the mainstream newspapers and network news....... was still editing the Times, do you suppose it would have just run a story starting off with...
Does anyone in America doubt that Kerry has a higher IQ than Bush? I'm sure the candidates' SATs and college transcripts would put Kerry far ahead...
To Bush-bashers, it may be the most infuriating revelation yet from the military records of the two presidential candidates: the young George W. Bush probably had a higher I.Q. than did the young John Kerry...Of course, even the current regime at the Times nods to Howell by talking of the IQs of "the young" George Bush and John Kerry -- preserving the possibility that Kerry has a higher IQ today. One wonders in how many other articles that its ever run we can find the Times considering the possibility of such late-in-life IQ flip flops.
Still, be thankful for small steps towards a less bad press.
