From: "Robert G Lewis" 

Merely pointing out that Gannet owns the Times.

I think that when push comes to shove the owner will control the product.
Editors who go against the orders of the owners won't remain long. I do not
know if that is the case here or not. I really doubt the owner's are
pushing that story .

I subscribed to the Marine Times for several years, Overall I thought it
was a good publication and would trust any of the Military times far more
than Mark's MSM on military related news.

Bob Lewis
"Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
news:454ca760$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> The editor of the Military Times is Robert Hodierne
>
> http://www.asbpe.org/asbpeCF/archives_members_only/2003/07082003army_times.ht
m
> If you start editing your newspaper on the basis of what everybody who is
> affected by the story wants published or not published, you're in an
> untenable situation. We understood that a picture like that could increase
> the grief of the family but there was a larger issue at stake: portraying
> war and all of its horror. If you're going to cover an event and tell the
> truth, you have to tell the good and bad. Pictures are one way you tell
> stories.
>
> Do you think ethics differ for trade journalism vs. consumer journalism?
>
> Hodierne: If you want to be in the publishing business in the long haul,
> you will be stronger if you are perceived as honest, independent, fair and
> accurate. Sometimes that means you're going to write stories that will
> aggravate important people in your constituencies. You have to be prepared
> to weather that. If you're in an insurance trade, and you find out one
> company has been doing shady accounting, you need to write about it.
> Become indispensable as the honest broker in your field. If you find some
> insurance company that does something exemplary, it has more impact if you
> write critically versus only flattering pieces.
>
> http://www.hodierne.com/
>
> "Robert G Lewis"  wrote in message
> news:454c2899$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> They do own the Army, Navy, Marine, and Air Force Times.
>>
>> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
>> news:454c2414$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>> So that's the spin you are giving it - Gannett controls editorials for
>>> the military times?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Mark"  wrote in message
>>> news:454c1fb4$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Rich Gauszka"  wrote
in message
>>>> news:454c1c1e$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>> Ah Yes - now that the Military Times opposes Bush in
one area it is a
>>>>> mish-mosh of leftist talking points - GMAB
>>>>
>>>> No Rich, not at all. I don't care what Gannett says about
anything --
>>>> favoring my point of view or not.
>>>>
>>>>> It's called reality Mark
>>>>
>>>> Gannett News Service is reality to you? Not to me. >>> was, and remains, that leftists often point to
"military" publications
>>>> with an intent to mislead their audience into believing that same
>>>> publications are somehow related to the
government/military when they
>>>> know that is so much bullshit>
>>>>
>>>>> Will the Bush adherents  now ask for a paper burning
at all military
>>>>> bases?
>>>>
>>>> I doubt it, Bush adherents are for capitalism, Gannett
publishes as a
>>>> capitalist company to make a profit, why would anyone for
freedom want
>>>> to burn their papers? Rather, let them do their thing, only a fool
>>>> would not be able to see through a biased piece. >>> consistently disappointed in elections because they want so badly to
>>>> believe what the papers tell them, even as they know in
their heart of
>>>> hearts that what they're reading is false>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5