To: (Multiple email addresses may be specified by separating them with a comma)
BY Mark Shea
“The documents appear to have been acquired illegally and contain all manner of private information and statements that were never intended for the public eye, so they won’t be posted here.”—New York Times, on the Climategate emails, Nov. 20, 2009
“The articles published today and in coming days are based on thousands of United States embassy cables, the daily reports from the field intended for the eyes of senior policy makers in Washington. . . . The Times believes that the documents serve an important public interest, illuminating the goals, successes, compromises and frustrations of American diplomacy in a way that other accounts cannot match.”—New York Times, on the WikiLeaks documents, Nov. 29, 2010
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. - New York Times, February 7, 2006
Strangely, the New York Times had no problem running an image of The Holy Virgin Mary, in which we are treated to a Madonna with a clump of elephant dung on one breast and cutouts of genitalia from pornographic magazines in the background.
Our Manufacturers of Culture: bravely facing the applause of their peers.