Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/02/18
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Which brings up an interesting point about the so-called "liberal media" and "conservative media." While I understand reactionaries not liking the subjects papers such as the NYT and Washington Post chose to cover - plight of the poor and disenfranchised, establishment corruption, etc. etc. - it's a rare day indeed that those stories are ever proven to be inaccurate or "wrong." Annoying, even maddening, to those who don't want to read them? Sure. But wrong? Rarely. B. D. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Jeff Moore Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 11:24 AM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: [Leica] Re: Was anti-war stuff, is now, gasp, "Some of my friends are Republicans" 2003-02-17-23:16:40 bdcolen: > Sorry to shock you, Jim, but the truth is that while I find the > Editorial Page and OpEd offerings of the Wall Street Journal utterly > repulsive, I think that a good deal of its news coverage ranks with > the best in the country. In fact, Ed and OpEd pages aside, the Journal > is one of the best three or four papers in America... He's got a point there. There's a pretty dramatic dichotomy: the editorials tend to look as if they were written by "Ed Anger" of the Weekly World News, but the actual news coverage seems remarkably balanced. Indeed, I think the WSJ consistently wins awards for its international coverage. - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html