From: "Robert G Lewis" 

Mark seems to do that with everything he disagrees with .


"Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
news:454cc02d$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>I don't disagree with that. My disagreement with Mark was the automatic
>toss out of the entire story with the MSM excuse equating it to leftist
>talking points.
>
> Perhaps the Army has changed since my day but to think  ( as many neocons
> seem to do ) that grunts are automatically in lock step with the decisions
> of their  officers/CIC is absurd.  
>
>
> "Robert G Lewis"  wrote in message
> news:454cbbd4{at}w3.nls.net...
>> 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.
htm
>>> 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