Ignore them and maybe they’ll just go away

This, apparently, was the line of reasoning at the Santa Fe New Mexican, whose editorial staff elected not to cover the Tea Party held here in Santa Fe at the State Capitol on Saturday, September 12.  This egregious example of biased journalismis the subject of my New Mexico Independent column today.

Comments 12

  1. Dan wrote:

    Perhaps they just didn’t want to give free publicity to a cynical and disgusting attempt to exploit the tragedy of 9/11 for partisan gain?

    Posted 15 Sep 2009 at 3:38 pm
  2. Bowden Russell wrote:

    How was the protest on 9/12 an attempt at exploitation of the victims of 9/11 Dan?

    Posted 15 Sep 2009 at 9:52 pm
  3. Dan wrote:

    Because it was a date picked specifically by Glenn Beck for his “9/12 project” which is specifically dedicated to exploiting 9/11 for partisan gain, Bowden.

    Posted 15 Sep 2009 at 11:15 pm
  4. MIT Mommy wrote:

    Although I do not read your local paper, I can express my general disgust with the inability of news media to decide the ‘newsworthiness’ of news. Or, perhaps they have simply decided to print only what is newsworthy in their narrow opinion at times.

    News will always have a slight bias, because an editor must always choose one story over another in placement and length, but I do think the emphasis has been placed too far into the realm of selling media rather than reporting news – and sometimes it is even worse than that.

    I am sure you have spent time looking at statistics and attempting to verify them – but I doubt the general public does. I have seen some numbers that are unbelievable because, well, they shouldn’t be believed.

    Of course, bloggers should never be trusted.

    Posted 16 Sep 2009 at 2:50 am
  5. Bowden Russell wrote:

    Because it was a date picked specifically by Glenn Beck for his “9/12 project” which is specifically dedicated to exploiting 9/11 for partisan gain, Bowden.

    Only a true paranoid would come to that conclusion.

    Posted 16 Sep 2009 at 3:27 am
  6. Dan wrote:

    Only a true paranoid would come to that conclusion.

    Yes, it takes a true paranoid to have bothered to learn that the origin of Beck’s “9/12 project” was ostensibly for the country to be as united as it was on 9/12/01. Of course, over time he eventually revealed that it was actually about being as divisive as possible on strictly partisan lines but in no way does that negate that the entire thing is a disgusting attempt to exploit 9/11 for partisan (and in Beck’s case, monetary) gain.

    Fortunately for Beck, the tiny proportion of the country that is both extremely right wing and very gullible fell for it hook line and sinker, to the tune of about 150K people in DC apparently 400 or so in Santa Fe.

    Posted 16 Sep 2009 at 5:23 pm
  7. Bowden Russell wrote:

    Fortunately for Beck, the tiny proportion of the country that is both extremely right wing and very gullible fell for it hook line and sinker, to the tune of about 150K people in DC apparently 400 or so in Santa Fe.

    Oh, another attempt at saying how many were there in DC.

    What is this, you’re fifth attempt at getting it right?

    What happened to the 50,000? That was your last one. Now we’re back up to 150,000?

    Posted 17 Sep 2009 at 5:31 am
  8. Towanda wrote:

    Two things.

    We used a pretty foolproof system to count the number of people at our tea party in Santa Fe. There were not
    “apparently” 400 people there; there were at least TWICE that many, plus a few that didn’t get into the count.

    Secondly. The Santa Fe New Mexican did post several letters today addressing the tea party here on Saturday. Maybe they got enough response from people who wondered why they didn’t bother to cover the event, and decided to do the right thing and give it some publicity in the Letters section….

    Posted 17 Sep 2009 at 3:07 pm
  9. Bowden Russell wrote:

    Towanda,
    Thank you for the post. The libs and their socialists allies are in for a shock in the 2010 midterms.

    Posted 17 Sep 2009 at 7:29 pm
  10. Dan wrote:

    Us “Libs” are shaking in our boots at the GOP’s 24% approval rate.

    Posted 18 Sep 2009 at 12:23 am
  11. Bowden Russell wrote:

    Still waiting for your 2010 predictions on the Dem seat pick-up.

    ;->

    Posted 18 Sep 2009 at 12:44 am
  12. Towanda wrote:

    Dan,
    I am very interested in this topic. Could you tell me which poll showed the GOP has a 24% approval rate and when the poll was taken? Thanks.

    Posted 18 Sep 2009 at 1:30 am

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *