Showing posts with label lack of credibility. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lack of credibility. Show all posts
McCain Story an Indication of "State of the Times"
UPDATE: Times Writer Paid to Write Hit Piece
easily be used as a chart for circulation, advertising and credibility.
It may also be the source of the Times gloomy reporting on the US economy.
John Weaver, John McCain's former political adviser said that he never talked to or asked Vicki Iseman about a romantic relationship with the Senator, because "he never had any reason to."
CNN contacted Weaver--and fairly easily it seems to us--after the New York Times hinted, insinuated and danced around the idea in yesterday's story that there may have been a romantic relationship between Iseman and McCain.
Some reports are calling the Times story a "hit piece" and McCain himself labeled the story a "smear" this morning.
UPDATE: From Newsbusters 2:10 pm Thursday February 21, 2008 It seems that one of the Times reporters on the John McCain story was paid by a liberal activist group to write another newspaper story about another Republican senator a couple years ago. As media digest the recent John McCain sex scandal allegations by the New York Times, one side of the story seems destined to get ignored: one of the four co-authors took money from a liberal activist group to fund a hit piece about Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Kent.) in 2006. |
It's more accurate to label the story as "Times reporting" and let it go at that.
Former McCain political adviser John Weaver confirms to CNN that he did approach lobbyist Vicki Iseman about eight years ago, during McCain’s first presidential run, and told her she was threatening to undermine the heart of McCain’s campaign – that he is a reformer.
Weaver says he arranged the meeting with Iseman — first reported by the New York Times — out of concern that she was “telling people around town” she was getting access to, and had influence with, McCain that Weaver says she did not have.
But Weaver insists he never talked to or asked Iseman about any romantic relationship with McCain because “there was no reason to.”
“My concern wasn’t about anything John had done, it was about her comments it was about access she claimed to have had,” Weaver told CNN. “I had no reason to question her about anything that is implied in the New York Times story.”
Weaver was McCain’s campaign manager until this past summer, when he left as part of a staff shakeup. But Weaver tells CNN he still talks to campaign officials on a daily basis and he still “loves John McCain.”
“I don’t have an axe to grind,” Weaver said.
John McCain's campaign would have been better served by issuing a one-sentence response.
"The story appeared in the New York Times."
Of course, the McCain campaign was likely pleased to have recently received the Times Republican endorsement.
But then the Times had to endorse someone on the Republican side, if only for appearance sake.
The charts accompanying this story show the NY Times stock prices and circulation figures. As can clearly be seen, the Times is in a long-term spiral downwards.
Either graph could just as easily be one of the NY Times credibility and trustworthiness in delivering fair unbiased reporting.
As reported last week, the Times is cutting staff by 500 in its newsroom operations.
(Mainstream Media Cutbacks: Jobs, Stock Prices, Advertising, Bureaus, Ratings)
The Vicki Iseman-John McCain story is just the latest example of "Times reporting".
Expect the downward spiral to continue.
DBKP Political Scandal Library Over 35 stories on scandals involving the 2008 presidential candidates. Included are stories and videos on Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, John McCain and Barack Obama. If you are a New York Times reader, read the stories that you never saw in the "Grey Lady"--except for McCain. |
by Mondoreb
images:
* political calculations
*johnsville
Source:
* Former McCain Aide Speaks Out on Times Report
Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.
The New Republic's "Shock Troops" story has clearly turned from Scott Beauchamp to the lack of responsibility at TNR. First stonewalling, now talking about non-issues, TNR refuses to address any of the article's disputed points. Next week's tactic may be for the magazine to enter rehab to garner it some sympathy.
Hot Air is not buying the latest bait-and-switch tactics at TNR.
The rehabilitation of Scott Thomas Beauchamp may have been premature.
We are now to believe that two weeks after Scott Thomas Beauchamp issued the Mother of All No Comments to his editors at The New Republic on tape, he rang up Franklin Foer and told him that he still stood by all of his articles (minus the one little detail about shifting the melted woman story from the battlefield DFAC in Iraq to the rear echelon DFAC in Kuwait, and prior to Beauchamp’s entry in the war, details which render the story nonsense). We’re not supposed to notice that. We’re also not supposed to remember how TNR’s fact-checkers manipulated their Bradley subject matter expert with vague and misleading questions designed to lead the witness toward their point of view, rather than the facts, and we’re also not supposed to notice that to date TNR hasn’t responded to that allegation at all. Put that out of your mind.
No compass bearings can be obtained in the Sargasso Sea. The USS TNR also has trouble with its bearings as this latest chapter in the Scott Beauchamp story has been released to the general blogging public. As Bryan at Hot Air succinctly points out: in order to find believable TNR’s latest version of the Truth about Scott Beauchamp’s “Shock Troops”, one has to check their memory at their keyboard. The earlier chapters in this Epic Saga of Deniability and Credibility still need answers.
When will TNR admit that they failed to fact check Scott Beauchamp. If they had done so at the very beginning,they could have presented their case without the “Army refuses to cooperate with us” cover.
At this juncture, our failure to believe Scott Beauchamp has morphed into a failure to believe TNR. Past TNR performance in the believability department is not helping. If they continue to stand by their man, without addressing the issues, TNR risks losing any remaining shreds of credibility.
If they haven't already done so.
by Little Baby Ginn
notes by mondoreb
[image:commongroundcommonsense]
Back to Front Page.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
