Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
 

 
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Contributors:
  •   Please send any comments or suggestions about America 3.0 to:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Lex's Tweets
  • Jonathan's Tweets
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Source Boycott of the Times

    Posted by Shannon Love on June 27th, 2006 (All posts by )

    Via Instapundit comes word that House members are circulating a letter asking that the House revoke the New York Times’s press credentials. I think I have a better idea. Politicians and other interviewees should simply refuse to answer any questions from Times reporters on any subject. Unlike a more traditional boycott where the consumers refuse to purchase the target’s products, this boycott would cut the Times off from its sources of information.

    Let the Times try to do real reporting on political matters when a large number of major politicians will not talk to them.

     

    6 Responses to “Source Boycott of the Times”

    1. Ginny Says:

      Well, they can always talk to disgruntled underlings. Or, of course, make it up.

      Belmont Club, as usual, has an interesting take, Childhood’s End. He sees a belief in a free lunch (or having our cake & eating it, too). How many old truisms were uttered by our mothers to check that human tendency? Apparently not enough to affect the Kellers of the world.

    2. Helen Says:

      Some of us have a similar attitude to the BBC on this side of the Pond. “We don’t do BBC” has become a frequent refrain.

    3. James M Says:

      “Let the Times try to do real reporting on political matters when a large number of major politicians will not talk to them.”

      As opposed to all the serious reporting they do now? On, e.g., Augusta National’s membership policies?

    4. Billy Says:

      1. Now, lets see, the Wall Street Journal gets a free pass even though they printed the story.
      2 Ever since Karl Rove has slipped the noose from the Grand Jury, he’s been back with a roar.
      3. Read what’s out there about this topic and you’ll discover the news been known since 2002 that the US has been “monitoring” the money trail. (but not the 2 billion that FEMA has misappropriated)
      4. How are we any less safe than before the story was printed?
      5. Rep.Peter King has been supportive of a terrorist group for years.
      6. This is all about politics (election 2006) not national security, children; get real.
      7. Hasn’t the Bush administration been boycotting the reporters all of these years?

    5. PoliticalCritic Says:

      This is simply a political move to shore up the base a litte more. Much like gay marriage and flag burning, the GOP knows that their base despises the NY Times, so they take a week to go after them. They have no intention of removing their press credentials or anything else. It’s simply to get Bush’s approval back over 40%.

    6. Sandy P Says:

      I cxld my subscription to the WSJ and told them I don’t support traitors.

      Oddly or hopefully enough, the cxlation line was busy and she had to take my info.