Archive for the ‘New York Times’ Category

Alaska’s Largest Newspaper Endorses Obama

October 26, 2008

Earlier this week when the New York Times endorsed Obama for president, Republican sympathizers jokingly feigned shock and disbelief, calling it good for a few good laughs. Who will endorse who next? FoxNews and News Corp. endorsing McCain? NBC to finally officially endorse Obama?

But this one will probably stun rather make the GOP laugh. Citing the need for a steady hand to handle America’s crisis, Alaska’s largest newspaper, Anchorage Daily News, endorses Barack Obama for President.

Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee, brings far more promise to the office. In a time of grave economic crisis, he displays thoughtful analysis, enlists wise counsel and operates with a cool, steady hand. The same cannot be said of Sen. McCain.

While still maintaining that Palin would be ready to assume the job of a Vice President, present serious problems like economic meltdown, two deadly wars and a deteriorating climate crisis would be stretching their governor beyond her range. The editorial concludes that putting Sarah Palin a heart-beat away “from the leadership of the free world is just too risky at this time.”

This endorsement from the Alaska newspaper certainly throws everyone into genuine surprise and disbelief, given that Sarah Palin is the governor of the State with purported 80% approval. If at all significant, this highlights McCain-Palin ticket’s continuing trouble with the mainstream media on issues that matter.

Read the Anchorage Daily editorial here.

America is as plural and diverse as ever

September 5, 2008


It’s really exciting to see reactions on issues about the US presidential election in real time. The power of the media has somehow provided an avenue of understanding (or misunderstanding,) but as I pointed out, the partisanship makes it hard for ordinary Americans to make their choices. The public is now compelled to winnow the chaffs from the grains as the political fight comes closer to the election. Hoping that the saturation of information will reach the inattentive, I think by and large, a good number of Americans will decide based on their guts.

From my perspective, I can say majority of the media outfits favor the Democrats—there are more liberals than conservatives in the New York Times, the Boston Globe, Washington Post, LA Times, Baltimore Sun, Atlanta Herald, Miami Herald, Houston Chronicle, Denver Post, New Orleans-Picayune, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Minneapolis Star, San Francisco Chronicle,……They complement the secular progressives in the MSNBC, CNN, and CBS. And almost all comedians in American late-night TV are liberals as much as movie-director Michael Moore and his stars in Hollywood.

Academics in many learning institutions, like the traditional UP professors, are generally known as liberals too, many left-leaning and socialistic; majority is anti-establishment. Whether they do that because many of them do not find a lucrative niche in society (as much as the flashy entrepreneurs in business and government) is subject to debate. In spite of the preponderance of Democratic support, they still have to win the electorate to their side.

On the rightist and conservative front, I notice Fox News leans towards the Republicans in spite of their claim of being “fair and balanced.” Talk radios which have gained popularity in recent years, have broadcasters like Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’ Reilly, Laura Schlessinger, Michael Savage, and few more lending support to conservatives.

Partisan programming could be the result of the repeal of the FCC Fairness Doctrine which required that stations give free air time for answers to controversial opinions. Now, it gives more burden on busy citizens to be informed lest they only listen to what they want to hear. There’s a price to pay for missing the views of the opposite side.

The American heartland is as plural and diverse as the birds of the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge. One cannot be all the way supportive of one party without missing the goodies of the other. Put it in another way, one can’t brush aside a party without seeing the folly of the other. That’s why Ron Paul, an eccentric hardworking American who didn’t get the presidential nomination in the Republican ticket also wages his own political battle on the side. So let’s look what happens on the day of election. (Photo Credits: Pierre Marcel; Mark Berry; photobyrich)=0=

========================================================

An 82% Drop In NY Times Profit Earnings: Why?

July 27, 2008

New York Times Chief Executive Janet Robinson blamed her company’s profit decline to the “US economic slowdown and secular forces playing out across the media industry.” Considering the sluggish business climate, she meant, the newspaper incurred high operational expenses and it lost some of its profit-generating advertisers.

New York Times Co. says its second-quarter earnings fell 82 percent from the year-ago quarter boosted by a one-time gain. Meanwhile, print advertising revenue continued to shrink.

The New York-based newspaper publisher says its quarterly net income dropped to $21.1 million, or 15 cents per share, which included 11 cents per share in buyout costs.” Breitbart.com/AP (07/23/08) Photo Credit: AP/Lennihan, M.

The National Association of America (NAA) likewise reported newspaper industry’s sharpest fall in print classifieds in decades, needing the boost of internet ads revenue to counter losses. In the first quarter of 2008, total ad revenues for newspapers amounted to $804 million, a 7.2 percent rise over Q1 2007’s $750 million. But this is lower than the 22% growth rate from the previous year. ClickZ Network (06/16/08, Kaye, K.)

There’s more to the drop in NY Times earnings than what the eyes can see. Critics say the newspaper has pandered heavily to the anti-American agenda of the secular progressives, leftists, and liberals who tolerate bias and unbalanced reporting. The newspaper isn’t the kind that subscribers have been used to reading. This certainly causes alienation particularly among disappointed conservatives who expect non-partisan coverage and fairness in reporting.

A number of subscribers dropped out of advertising and readership, disillusioned by the perception that the newspaper is “biased, anti-American, and rabidly anti-Pres. George W. Bush.” There are those who complain NY Times gives lop-sided coverage for Barack Obama’s campaign in the current presidential race to the disadvantage of John McCain whose OpEd has been refused publication by the newspaper.

In 2003, there was Jayson Blair who resigned from the newspaper after being caught of plagiarism and fabrication. A few months ago, it printed innuendoes implying infidelity and wrongdoing in an unsubstantiated McCain-Vicki Iseman “affair.” The newspaper came up with the worst discouraging assessments about the Iraq War which made readers feel someone in America wanted the United States to fail. =0=