Sunday, September 23, 2007

Another Mea Culpa from NYT

The New York Times admits it gave an undeserved discount and that allowing the despicable ad violated their own policy. Unfair and biased, as the NYT usually is,
The NYT needs to make a formal apology to General Petraeus and should donate the ad revenue to charities that support US soldiers.

The New York Times acknowledged Sunday that a controversial advertisement attacking Gen. David Petraeus, the American commander in Iraq, was sold to a liberal activist group at a discount rate the organization was not entitled to receive, and that the paper violated its own advertising policies when it published the ad.
In a column published Sunday entitled, "Betraying Its Own Best Interests," Times Public Editor Clark Hoyt wrote that after reviewing the Times' policies regarding the sale and content of advertisements and conducting his own investigation of the matter, "I think the ad violated the Times' own written standards, and the paper now says that the advertiser got a price break it was not entitled to."
According to the column, purchased the ad at a "standby" rate of $64,575 when it should have been charged $142,083. To receive standby rates, advertisers cannot be guaranteed a date when their ads will run, but the sales representative who sold the ad to told the organization that the ad would run on Monday, Sept. 10—the day that Petraeus was to appear before Congress.

1 comment:

Mrs. George L. O'Hirlihy said...

Dear Sir,

I wholeheartedly stand with you and the entire staff of the New York Times. Your concise and on-point examination of the purely partisan, anti-war stance taken by The Times is greatly appreciated.

As a side note, I congratulate you for supporting Lord Black. For too long have the Monarchy and The Peerage been maligned by those who should know their place. Bravo to you sir.

I Support Lord Black