Top Leaderboard, Site wide
September 2, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates








Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
A/V Booth

Olbermann Slams New York Times

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Jan 3, 2008
Olbermann

The New York Times made it onto Keith Olbermann’s “worst person” list with the news that the paper had hired William Kristol: “You guys at the Times can hire any conservative columnist you want, but why did you pick the really dumb one?”

Watch it:

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By Conservative Yankee, January 8, 2008 at 7:47 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I didn’t suggest you insulted anyone, and as to Franklin and Paine, anyone can communicate with them.. they “wrote” that’s when people make little marks on paper which others can decode.  These papers are bound together and called “books” Franklin and Paine wrote many of these.

As to the NYT selling in one to two years?

Maybe,

BUT they have recently been “buying” and (IMHO) diminishing their so called “independent status.

They now Own the Boston Globe, The Worcester Telegram, and The Press Democrat along with several papers scattered throughout the south.

Currently, their stock is holding well when compared to competitors!

Report this

By LVogt, January 7, 2008 at 6:50 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It’s not that Kristol is conservative or even biased.
It’s not that he’s usually wrong.
It’s that he’s dishonest that should disqualify him.

Report this
Gabir's avatar

By Gabir, January 7, 2008 at 4:32 pm Link to this comment

IN RESPONSE TO CONSERVATIVE YANKEE : #124796

  Dear Conservative Yankee ,
    Did I in any way insult the New York Times or American newspaper readers in my original comments ? I simply stated what I feel is true in respect to the slow death of a media format that American newspaper readers , including myself , depended on for decades as a source for mostly unbiased , accurate reporting .
      If you can communicate with Ben Franklin or Thomas Paine , please let us all in on their opinion on this subject and what they plan to do about it .
      The New York Times is sinking financially and at the present time are attempting any form of damage control to survive as an independent paper . Has anyone pondered whether the hiring of Mr. Kristol might actually be a part of this survival strategy - an attempt to attract readers from the conservative block - liberals , critics , and Mr. Olbermann be damned . As for Mr. Olbermann , it seems that he has carved himself a unique role in the news business . No matter who he labels worst this or worst that , the person or entity he claims to loathe is back the next day with as many if not more readers , listeners , or viewers .  As for Mr. Olbermann , viewers of his shows see him as some kind of superhero , an everyman to the huddled masses . Maybe he is the real thing - MAYBE .If you read his history of employment at the three major networks , Fox News , and ESPN , it was a long journey in finding the best outlet for his caustic rantings . It is an amazing coincedence that MSNBC would create the perfect setting for Keitho - the alter ego of Billo . A one hour faux-news program of ultraliberal rantings and ravings to counter the neocons at Fox News . News has become more about entertainment than ever before .
    As for the New York Times - I predict that in one to two years they will sell - they will have no other options .

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, January 7, 2008 at 6:10 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

By Gabir, January 6 at 9:51 pm

“As recently as twenty years ago , the American Press had the upper hand in the equation between a company buying advertising time or space and the media entity selling the time or space . The relationship between advertisers and media had more to do with seling a product or service and less to do with the corporations via advertising controlling the content of what was broadcasted or printed betwen the ads .”

What you say MAY be true, as far as it goes, BUT Both Ben Franklin, and Thomas Paine warned readers “Subscribers must pay the full cost of a newspaper, or they will get only news of which other sponsors approve.”

The NYT was the most conservative “full fold” New York City paper in my youth. The World, The Telegram &Sun;, and even the Journal American had a far more liberal slant.

That the Times survived says a bunch about the US newspaper readers.

Report this
Gabir's avatar

By Gabir, January 6, 2008 at 10:51 pm Link to this comment

I have read The New York Times for years and have sensed that this once highly respected paper has succumbed to the same economic pressures that have led to the eventual downfall and selling of virtually all independent print papers to corporate entities . Advertising has always played a major role in all forms of media , including newspapers . There is a major difference between the advertising of today and the sale of advertising space in years past .
    As recently as twenty years ago , the American Press had the upper hand in the equation between a company buying advertising time or space and the media entity selling the time or space . The relationship between advertisers and media had more to do with seling a product or service and less to do with the corporations via advertising controlling the content of what was broadcasted or printed betwen the ads .
    Today the roles have been totally reversed - television and radio news sold out years ago . Major independent newspapers held out as long as possible , but one after another they were forced to sell to large conglomerates to survive , the survival being mostly in title with little recognizable content sustained .
    This is where the New York Times finds itself today . It is the last family owned major paper left and despite many different attempts to raise revenue to remain independent , the only solution left was to sell more and more advertising space , both in the actual print paper and the internet version .
      The corporations have taken control of much of the content and also have a powerful influence over the social and political commentary printed in The New York Times of today . It will not be much longer before The New York Times is just another tabloid in the checkout at your favorite supermarket .
    The Newspaper format of media was at one time the most respected source to find not just the “news” , but also the truth . Today’s papers are a waste of trees and a waste of time to read . I view this change as the slow death of an old , dear friend , who finally can no longer fight the malignant cancer eating at it’s body and soul , finally dying and leaving me to mourn and cherish the fond memories of what used to be .

Report this

By Louise, January 6, 2008 at 7:36 pm Link to this comment

Krystol Balls

Thomas that’s funny!

Been taking the Times for many years. Well not quite right, until a couple of years ago.

Know what?

NYT didn’t change, I did!

They’re pretty much the same as they’ve been for as long as I can remember. Heavily relied on and enormously respected.

But along came the Internet, Independent Media, and a new education!

When I first started using the Internet to email and hunt and pick, there wasn’t a whole lot on it. Now of course, there really is no need to buy the Times. Nothing there I cant find on the web and a heck of a lot on the web I’ll never find in the Times!

Besides, I still get it on line if I want to read anything.

There are still people who are afraid to go on-line. Afraid to look for an alternate source of news. Afraid they or their kids, or their money will be attacked by the cyberspace predators.

Most of all they are afraid to admit they don’t know everything and ask someone to show them how to do it!

(Of course their kids go on-line all the time. At school, at the Library, at a friends house, which is why we will see major change!)

People that afraid tend to be conservative.

Maybe that’s why the Times has Krystol. Maybe they desperately need to attract conservative consumers.

Not because they want to “overcome” that bad rap about being “too liberal”, but because they have to guarantee readership to their advertisers.

Will Krystol have a negative influence on the reader?

Do conservatives wake up every morning looking for a negative to fear and gossip about?

Will the Sun come up tomorrow?

Hope so. wink

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, January 6, 2008 at 6:35 pm Link to this comment

Oh, and BTW, I am deeply disappointed that the NYT has hired William Kristol for any job above the rank of janitor.  Kristol is truly delusional.

ITW.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, January 6, 2008 at 6:33 pm Link to this comment

Lenin Not Lennon, January 4 at 12:24 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
NYT is bad because

NYT is owned by Jews.

Kristol is a Jew.

PNAC was written and promoted by Jews.

Israel is a Zionist Jew entity, promoted by all of the above.

Draw your own conclusions…....

OK. How about this?

You are a racist nit-wit.

Fits your “thinking” perfectly.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, January 5, 2008 at 12:23 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

What’s new? 

William Buckley, to Bill Safire, to Billy Kristol.  They just get dumber and dumber.  I remember when I was in High school, the Gray-lady decided that writing at an 8th grade level was losing the paper business, so they dumbed the content to sixth grade abilities.

So now, a second grader has no trouble understanding


As Dolly Parton sung:

“...He preached so plain a cow could understand….”

Report this

By parmaher, January 5, 2008 at 3:25 am Link to this comment

To publish perspectives that are not found everywhere is what pundits are supposed to do.  Don’t you think that reading something you disagree with is far more thought-provoking than something you already know?  I want every possible view of a situation so that I can have confidence that my personal viewpoint is, at least, well-educated.  In fact, that is what defines well-educated.  I appreciate, whole-heartedly, the NYTimes attempt to include diversity in their editorials.  The major problem with media(FOXnews, CNN, MSNBC) these days is that they cater to an audience to increase sales instead of saying what they think and encouraging readers to think and respond.  Front page is no place for editorials, but when it is understood that the writer’s opinion is his own, no paper should base what side of a debate they happen to argue from when hiring.

Report this

By jhquinn@att.net, January 4, 2008 at 3:54 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Why are the most of you folks on this site so negitive?,and no I,m not a Jew. I remember most of you were spouting the NYT’s loke it was the Bible

Report this
Paolo's avatar

By Paolo, January 4, 2008 at 3:29 pm Link to this comment

Something’s wrong with this country when someone who has been absolutely dead wrong on every major foreign policy issue gets hired by the New York Times to comment on foreign policy!

Hell, they could just pick people at random from the New York phone book, and get commentators who are right more often than Kristol.

Report this

By Lenin Not Lennon, January 4, 2008 at 1:24 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

NYT is owned by Jews.

Kristol is a Jew.

PNAC was written and promoted by Jews.

Israel is a Zionist Jew entity, promoted by all of the above.

Draw your own conclusions…....

Report this

By Dr. Knowitall, PhD, PhD, January 4, 2008 at 11:09 am Link to this comment

I’m liking Olbermann more and more.

Report this

By msgmi, January 4, 2008 at 8:57 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Billy ‘neoCON’ Kristol is a genetic clone of Heinrich Himmler, the ‘lebensraum’ version of command and control. NY Times should consider the dynamic duo, a mutation of ‘shock & awe’ Don ex-SecDef, and Billy K, to contribute their thoughts on the PNAC plan for the New World Order in the 21st century.

Report this

By Trevor, January 4, 2008 at 8:24 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Everytime I listen to right-wing radio, say Hugh Hewitt or S. Hanity-they use the NYT as a virtual swear word, considering not simply leftist but almost Communist or al-Queda. And yet that paper seems to almost court the right, seeming almost apologetic that it occasionally criticises a conservative President or politician. 

Olberman is right on, I welcome conservative voices, even when I don’t agree with their beliefs they need to be heard and at the very least it helps sharpen our arguments against them.  But, to be less polite than Kieth, surely they could find someone with his head less far up his own ass.  I mean, this guy should barely be allowed to blog, forget about being honored as a sage.

Report this

By moe, January 4, 2008 at 8:04 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

They are just pandering to “Idiot America” which makes up about 49% of the public. They are just managing by the numbers.

Report this

By Hammo, January 4, 2008 at 5:59 am Link to this comment

Reporting in the New York Times during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq apparently was very influential in mobilizing support for the war ... even though much of the information in the Times was innaccurate.

Times reporter Judith Miller was often singled out as having been a conduit for misleading information coming from those planning the invasion of Iraq.

The hiring of Kristol is just more of the same.

The Times lost credibility as a responsible journalistic platform a long time ago, as did the Society of Professional Journalists.

See the article ...

“Society of Professional Journalists’ Award to Judith Miller Helps Cover-Up?”

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=3287

Report this

By weather, January 4, 2008 at 5:27 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Olbermann, if you were really authentic, you’d confront the NYTimes on how they turned their back on 9/11 and the horrible crime that was engineered right in their zip code.

The NYTimes isn’t a newspaper at all, its a PR firm and PNAC is just one of their dark clients.

Report this

By Thomas Billis, January 3, 2008 at 11:14 pm Link to this comment

The Times has sucked for a while now and this is just another nail in the once great newspapers coffin.What is next Ann Coulter on religious affairs.That would be perfect.

Report this

By feedback, January 3, 2008 at 10:48 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

video says “we’re sorry, this video is no longer available”

Report this

By Goffredo, January 3, 2008 at 10:02 pm Link to this comment

Just discussed PNAC and its attempted perversion of American ideals.

http://thefederalistpapers2007.blogspot.com

Report this

By P. T., January 3, 2008 at 8:44 pm Link to this comment

If you are a conservative, it does not matter how horribly wrong you are.  Conservatives fail upwards.

Report this

By weather, January 3, 2008 at 6:03 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The New York Times died on 9/11, any integrity they had got crushed in their own rubble.

They don’t report, they choreograph, just ask Judy Miller and all those who signed off on the fraud.

Report this
 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.