|
|
|
|
|
|
Jens 'n' Frens |
|
|
|
|
|
When I first heard that the New York Times accepted advertising from the government of Sudan, I didn't get really worked up about it, since I don't think of the medium of an ad as an endorser of it. But Gateway Pundit makes a good point:The New York Times explains this months publication policy:...Daily News columnist Lloyd Grove quotes a Times spokesperson as saying the paper took the ad because of "our strong belief that all pages of the paper " news, editorial and advertising " must remain open to the free flow of ideas." But Mickey MacLean at World Views speculates that "it also didn't hurt that an estimated $929,000 freely flowed into the newspaper's coffers as a result of the section."But, here is how the New York Times answered the same question last month when asked why they would not publish the Muhammad cartoons:The New York Times and much of the rest of the nation's news media have reported on the cartoons but refrained from showing them. That seems a reasonable choice for news organizations that usually refrain from gratuitous assaults on religious symbols, especially since the cartoons are so easy to describe in words.Unless of course, it is a dung covered Virgin Mary painting. |
||
