Subject:
|
Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 8 Oct 2003 18:47:50 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
293 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
> Arnold admits to some of the charges and is a "good" guy and is "slimed"? How
> can he be slimed if he issues an apology, and a weak, vague one at that? Sounds
> more like it's the Times that is being slimed.
Bruce,
4 things:
1. The LA Times devoted 3 reporters for 7 weeks to investigate the character of
one of the candidates, while ignoring any character issues on the other
candidates. Gray Davis, for instance, is said to have a bad temper and has
lashed out verbally at staffers. If they had devoted 3 reporters for 7 weeks to
investigate this, surely Gray Davis could have been portrayed in a very poor
light. Simliarly Bustamante and McClintock may have character flaws that would
tarnish them, but who knows? No one reported on these.
2. At the same time they were publishing negative pieces on Arnold, glowing
puff pieces appeared on Tom McClintock. Most observers felt this was an attempt
to split the Republican vote by boosting McClintock.
3. The timing. Releasing this story right before the election was felt to be
very strategic to hurt Arnold when he wouldn't have adequate time to refute any
controversy.
4, and most damning. Read this article:
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/03/46/news-bradley17.php
I can't speak to the political affiliation of the reporter, but the LA Weekly is
a liberal paper (they endorsed a no vote on the recall and Huffington as
replacement), and they claim that the LA Times leaked the story to Deomocrat
strategists, which allowed them time to prepare commercials and campaign
strategy. Perhaps there is some sense of the small weekly publication trying to
stick it to the big giant of local print journalism (LA is essentially a one
newspaper town. The Daily News and La Opinion (spanish language) don't have
much impact, and the weeklies like the LA Weekly, Valley Beat etc are more niche
market), but even with that, if these charges are true, the LA Times news
division -- not the editorial page -- was actively working on behalf of one side
of a political campaign.
Bruce
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
| (...) Okay, answer me this - would you assign 3 reporters to investigate bad temper when everyone involved is in one spot, or 3 reporters to investigate alleged criminal transgressions with the witnesses scattered about? Which is newsworthy? Davis (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
| (...) Character flaws? If true, the actions described are generally in the way of sexual assault. I might have a bad temper -- yeah, that's bad. But if I grope your wife, daughter, brother, son, or even you -- I've probably committed a crime! (...) (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
| (...) Arnold admits to some of the charges and is a "good" guy and is "slimed"? How can he be slimed if he issues an apology, and a weak, vague one at that? Sounds more like it's the Times that is being slimed. (...) This really has nothing to do (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
34 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
