• But in here it's so delightful - thoughts on Obama and the weather
• Protectionism: Everybody stimulate yourself!
• I like the pictures
• Mandela, King, Gandhi... Blagojevich
• Shovels are so 1933
• The cutting edge is nipping at its own tail
• Funny Because It's True (yet again)
• Obligatory Gaza
• Being Reasonable--reaction from the Muslim family recently thrown off a flight by AirTrain
• Won't you be my neighbor?
• Snowzilla
• ZOMG! Radioactive coal sludge will kill us all! (updated)
• Quick points on the auto industry bailout
• Slow and Steady
• Foreign policy and international public opinion

• January 2009
• December 2008
• November 2008
• October 2008
• September 2008
• August 2008
• July 2008
• June 2008
• May 2008
• April 2008
• March 2008
• February 2008
• January 2008
• November 2007
• October 2007
• September 2007
• August 2007
• July 2007
• June 2007
• May 2007
• April 2007
• March 2007
• February 2007
• January 2007
• December 2006
• November 2006
• October 2006
• September 2006
• August 2006
• July 2006
• June 2006
• May 2006
• April 2006
• March 2006
• February 2006
• January 2006
• December 2005
• November 2005
• October 2005
• September 2005
• August 2005
• July 2005
• June 2005

« Our Knowledge Deficit | Main | Pork Chopped? »

NY Times: Predictable, Consistent

It's uncanny how many times this blog, in its short existence, has blasted the NY Times on their coverage failure. In just the last week there have been two entries written on the dying medium. On September 18th Wulf wrote:

Thus, a lack of coverage on a topic by the Times is an editorial statement in and of itself. With great readership comes great responsibility, and the Times has not been living up to that responsibility.

Indeed. And while the Times' staff is busy feeling self-important, Michelle Malkin and Hugh Hewitt are having a field day with the emerging NY Sen. Chuck Schumer scandal:

THE NYTIMES OMBUSDMAN IS TOTALLY WORTHLESS
Memo to DSCC Staffers

As of this writing, the NY Times remains the last of the major New York publications to report this story. Clearly it does meet the requisite "all the news that's fit to print within the confines of our agenda" criterion.

This question will reverberate throughout the Blogosphere for the next several weeks, so Atlas Blogged might as well echo it too: What if the shoe had been on the other foot? How many weeks in a row would the NY Times run this story on their front page if Republican operatives had done this to a Democrat minority? And what would it be called by the MSM? 1-800-FREECREDITGATE?

Ho-hum. I suppose it goes without saying that the ACLU is not bothered.