I thank you for recognizing that it is a side issue. I understand that the Washington Times is losing money and the Washington Post is as well. The point of this post was not that papers are losing money. It was what one paper did that is so unusual.

I agree with T. W. reading the WaPo and the like does not make one better informed 90% of the time, but that 10% keeps me coming back. I am sure that you notice that I link to the WaPo almost as often as I do the WSJ.

Thanks for dropping by Think123.

I must reiterate my prior view that you have no idea what I was posting about. Whether this is due to your lack or reading skills or my inability to write more clearly I will leave up to others but My point was not that “the Wahington Post Sucks or is biased etc., etc.” If this had been my point then I would have simply directed anyone towards Bernard Goldberg or Brent Bozell who do a much better job documenting the left wing bias of media outlets than my humble skills allow.

My post was made to emphasize that the Washington Post went beyond media bias and into the realm of soliciting money for subsequent favorable press treatment for those willing to pay up to $250,000 per year. My direct criticism of media outlets was due to my anticipation that none of them would ask the hard questions as to what one could expect for a $250,000 donation. After all I could give a $250.000 donation directly to the Obama crew and get an afternoon with Rahm Emmanuel discussing the best ways to house train puppies.

It’s interesting that you seize on one admittedly provactive description of certain media outlets to vent what is truly on your mind. We do not know each other but based on one phrase you typecast and stereotype me. Most folks would wait for 5 or more articles before demonstrating that type of knee jerk reaction.

Rest assured I do read the NYT and Wash. Post and at times the New Republic. I am not sure that makes me better informed. It does show me what others are thinking.

My message is – the right wing has this paranoia about the left wing “mainstream media”. This so called mainstream media consists of anything outside Fox, WSJ, and Limbaugh. The rest of our national media is a pack of left wing lies. It’s the old “real Americans vs the others”.

The Soviet propaganda in the NYT during the Cold War was in fact the actual world view of the Soviet Union. In American, unlike the Soviet Union, we are able to read enemy propaganda. It is called a free press, not a pro-American press.

Surprising how back in 1972, during the height of Vietnam, when there was only “mainstream media”, conservative Nixon beat liberal McGovern by the biggest landslide in history. Wonder how us poor slobs knew what was up? From CBS,NBC,ABC? That’s all there was. Walter Cronkite et al. How did we ever learn the truth?

Several of my friends say they can’t stand ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, MSNBC, The NYT, or WaPo. They call CNN the Communist News Network. All they watch is FOX. When I mention Public Broadcasting or the New York Times, these good people look shocked anyone would watch that crap. I have been around a long time, never saw this degree of self brainwashing.

Now my friend Tennesee here is a perfect example. He says the “mainstream media” is the mouthpiece for the DNC, but he never says what he means: The “mainstream media” is every thing in the USA other than Fox and the WSJ. Murdoch’s New Corporation is the only thing you can trust in America?

Which gets me back to the blank eyed, single minded people George Orwell wrote about. I write about this stuff because as a Republican I wonder why our Party has fallen so low. I think the childish intolerant view of the media make us look stupid.

The family had an agenda. Yet the seeming success of the agenda has not been mirrored in profitability. The paper is slimming down to cut costs but how far can they go? The Baltimore Sun is often falling on hard times as a result of an ideological disconnect between the local residents who choose to read and what appears on the news and editorial pages. Sometimes the line is rather blurred.

Open selling of access may not have been such a good PR move and the crowd centered around 20th & K may not have been that eager to pony up the cash.

This may be the biggest WaPo blunder since “Jimmy’s World”.

I wonder what variety of reading the writer of the above statement chooses to experience. One should never limit onself to a single publication or point of view. I learned very early about slanted articles and never forgot. Reading articles and editorials about myself was mere frosting on the cake.

Soviet propaganda in the 1930s was repackaged by ace reporter Walter Duranty and presented as news by the NYT. This traffic in lies won a Pulitzer Prize. It was never rescinded.

A WaPo reporter did a series called “Jimmy’s World” that also won a Pulitzer. The heart-rending tale of a young heroin addict (described in precise detail) made a lot of caring people want to help. It was all lies but some people in high places wanted to rehabilitate the fraudstress.

There is a certain ideological split between the news pages and the editorial pages and thinking people with a wide range of interests might enjoy feature articles such as the recent one on how many flowers got their names, from dandelions and marigolds to zinnias. Topics from archeology to zoology appear and they do add to the store of knowledge. There is even a vestige of a sports section.

By the way, if you just watch Fox and read the WSJ, then all you get is the Murdoch view of things. What would Orwell say if he knew if people would brainwash themselves without any help from Big Brother? Murdoch hooks ya with all the pretty blondes and grisly murders, then socks ya in the brain with his political education.

I do agree with you that Rev. Moon, the Moonies, and Murdoch have done good things for the conservative movement.