[Marxism] Cancelling a NY Times subscription

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxx>]

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/1103-22.htm
Why I Canceled The New York Times
by John Atcheson

Dear Mr. Sulzberger:

There's been a lot of moaning and gnashing of teeth about the fall in
circulation among major newspapers, including yours. I regret to inform
you, you just lost another customer. Allow me to explain why.

The Times' 11/2 coverage of the Senate private session forced by Rule 21
was among the most biased I've encountered by a major newspaper and I'm 56
and read several papers a day, so that's a large sample over a very long time.

"Partisan Quarrel Forces Senators to Bar the Doors" doesn't even
approximate the nature of the issue being raised.

Placing the story in the lower left hand corner doesn't assign it the
importance it deserves.

"Democrats Force Reckoning of Pre-War Intelligence" would describe the
content and its import far more accurately.

And for the record, the lead is not Bill Frist's anger -- it's what you
chose to split in half, burying the important part on Page 14. To wit: Pat
Roberts has slow-walked an examination of whether and how the
administration skewed intelligence in the run-up to the Iraqi War.

Lying the nation into a war is a big deal. A very big deal. The soon to be
indicted Mr. Frist's anger is not.

This paper now has the dubious distinction of being an accomplice to the
selling of a war entered into under false pretenses; enabling the election
of the war mongers who prosecuted this war by delaying the investigation of
Plamegate until after the 2004 election by pandering to an out of control
reporter who spearheaded your paper's role in spreading faked intelligence;
all but ignoring the Downing Street Memos which proved the administration
lied; and now, downplaying the importance of a crucial -- and heroic --
action to get Americans the truth.

Truth, by the way, used to be the pole star which guided the New York
Times. Under your reign it no longer is. And that is why I, along with
hundreds of thousands of others, are canceling our subscriptions, and why
the younger generation considers your paper irrelevant.

He-said, she-said reporting is neither interesting, nor informative. Biased
reporting such as your paper has been exhibiting lately, is worse -- it's
boringly predictable, and it misinforms.

The press was granted special status in the First Amendment because the
founding fathers believed an informed citizenry was vital to a functioning
democracy. That special status came with a codicil -- the duty to report
the truth (not, as the Times seems to think, the duty to protect reporters
who assist in spreading lies).

Truth. That's what's at issue here. And that's what you've once again all
but ignored in this latest example of being a mouthpiece for Republicans.

Wednesday's paper, my last, raised biased reporting to an art form -- a
very dark art.

The Soviet-era Pravda would be proud of your recent record, and your role
as government mouthpiece in the Iraqi debacle.

You should be ashamed. And you should seek to right this sad chapter in our
nation's history -- a history that the Times helped author -- at every
opportunity. Instead, you compound it.

When you are replaced, Mr. Sulzberger, I will consider reading the Times again.

Until then, Good night and good luck.

John Atcheson's writing has appeared in the Washington Post, the Baltimore
Sun, the San Jose Mercury News, the Memphis Commercial Appeal, as well as
in several policy journals.

--

www.marxmail.org


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism