Chutzpah

The Confederate Yankee, Monday:

s there any way for us to know just how much The New York Times charged MoveOn.org for their full page “General Betray Us” advertisement today? Did they pay full price, or did they get a special, reduced rate?

***

If Tapper’s numbers are correct, MoveOn.org paid just 38.89% of a full-cost, nationwide ad, or a 61.11% discount off of a full-rate ad. While I’m fairly certain that nobody pays “sticker” prices, 61% off seems a rather sweet deal.

I don’t know, intrepid sleuth. Why not call the NY Times advertising department and ask?

Oh, wait. Someone did, and you didn’t believe the the NY Times, and on Wednesday, had this to say:

ABC’s Jake Tapper, who first reported what Moveon.org paid for their ad, is on the story again today and reveals that a conservative organization who ran a full page ad the next day paid “significantly more.”

Oops.

It appears that the NY Times may take a much bigger hit to their the credibilty and the bottom line than they ever anticipated as a result.

I doubt stockholders will be pleased.

Of course, those investigative juices never got a flowing and you never inquired to know why the conservative group paid more (like, for example, their ad was in color, set to run on a specific day, etc.- not to mention these are Bush’s rich buddies and not too worked up about cash). Finally, after a week of pretending the NY Times did something wrong, you concede defeat (in your own special way, of course):

In other words, all the attention came as a result of the New York Times not putting their standby pricing on their rate cards, and the majority of the angry pixels expended in this incident were more than likely “much ado about nothing.”

Ahh, yes. It is the NY Times fault. You see, they failed to make all their ad prices clear to people who:

A.) never intend to spend a penny advertising with them
B.) hate them
C.) refuse to believe them when they call and ask their ad rates
D.) don’t even read their paper unless they think they can find some bias to wail about.

That, my friends, is how the right-wing blogosphere “investigates.” Create a charge, accuse someone of something, trumpet it wildly, get a bunch of mouthbreathers in a furor, and then, when it is obvious to everyone you have no proof, blame the person you accused.

Fun stuff. Never retreat, never surrender.

*** Update ***

I should probably add that my absolute favorite thing about this affair so far is that even when conceding defeat, the CY links to Dan Riehl, who has this to say:

But I would add an additional point, or two. Being the topic of the news agenda is a far different thing than setting said agenda. And if it weren’t for New Media, particularly blogs in this case, this particular agenda item would likely have never even been set. Duh!

Just so we are clear, if I call Dan Riehl a stupid motherfucker or accuse him of some trumped up bullshit, I am not insulting him or falsely accusing him, I am AGENDA SETTING!. Welcome to Wingnuttia.

*** Update ***

Even funnier, Owens is now deleting comments of those who point out his folly, and leaving the fawning ones praising him for his “good work.” A profile in courage and honesty.






33 replies
  1. 1
    Ted says:

    CY:

    In other words, all the attention came as a result of the New York Times not putting their standby pricing on their rate cards, and the majority of the angry pixels expended in this incident were more than likely “much ado about nothing.”

    This is their usual excuse when they get something completely wrong after a week-long outrage campaign; if only the target of their outrage had been more clear, or had provided certain details, or had produced the minutia of their business model the day the outrage began, none of this would have happened!

  2. 2
    Ted says:

    Ahh, yes. It is the NY Times fault. You see, they failed to make all their ad prices clear to people who…

    Sometimes I wonder if they realize they constantly use the standard excuses of abusive spouses.

  3. 3
    Tom Hilton says:

    And if it weren’t for New Media, particularly blogs in this case, this particular agenda item phony, cynical, and deeply stupid pseudo-scandal would likely have never even been set cooked up.

    Fixed.

    Oh, and TIDOS Yankee is a moron…but we knew that.

  4. 4
    Emily Litella says:

    Never mind!

  5. 5
    Ripley says:

    I believe the correct New Media phraseology is ‘catapulting the agenda.’

  6. 6
    Tom Hilton says:

    Also, blaming it on the rate card? Lamest excuse ever. Hell, Larry Craig is gloating right now because his excuse was better.

  7. 7
    Mike says:

    Don’t think the Times is off the hook. How do you know they don’t do this?

    “New York Times, ad department.”

    “Hi, I’d like to place an advocacy ad.”

    “Very good. Would that be a sensible, liberal ad that’s in touch with America’s real needs, or a hate-filled wingnut screed? We take both, of course.”

    “Umm, sensible.”

    “Very good. For a full-page ad, that’ll be… I’m sorry, did you say ‘sensible’?”

    “Yes, I did.”

    “In that case, let me explain our discount policy.”

  8. 8
    cleek says:

    i can’t wait to find out what bit of arcane knowledge we’ll all have to learn in response to next week’s Wingnut Freakout!

    now we know about NYT “rate cards” and “standby pricing”. last month we got to learn about the turning radius of the Bradley Fighting Vehicle and the characteristics of the Glock 9mm firing pin.

  9. 9
    whippoorwill says:

    Wingnut Credo

    Image is everything

    The truth is whatever helps your side win

    Accuse your opponents of your faults [you suspect you may have]

    Proclaim your lies are always taken out of context

    Obfuscation is a skill, master it

    Never admit your wrong

    Always say the other guy is more wrong

    If you’ve dug a hole for yourself, pull your opponent in with you, jump out and smirk with delight

    Never pass up an opportunity to call a liberal a traitor

    Always include Al Quaida in the same sentence with democrat

  10. 10
    laneman says:

    my brain hurts. the trials and tribulations of the right thinkers to convince us traitors and mal-thinkers is really amazing.

    I couldn’t make that shit up, and they spew it as gospel.

  11. 11
    Rick Taylor says:

    I’m glad Greenspan is talking now, though I’m still upset with him for giving the administration just enough cover to get their tax cuts past. That was a sweet bit of legerdemain. First under Clinton, be a deficit hawk, and get the liberals to work with you to save social security by increasing a regressive tax. Then when the liberals are out of power, hey there’s this surplus! Let’s forget about the trust fund and give a tax cut skewed towards the rich. Now we have massive deficits, and taxes have been skewed to hit the poor. Boy you conservatives sure put one over on us liberals!

    I supported the increase in the social security tax but that taught me a lesson. Don’t work with or try to compromise with conservatives; they’ll rip you off every time.

  12. 12

    Sometimes I wonder if they realize they constantly use the standard excuses of abusive spouses.

    The image that popped into my mind was that of the big brother holding his little brother by the forearms and saying “why are you punching yourself? Do you like punching yourself?” But yours is far better.

  13. 13
    grandpa john says:

    and the majority of the angry pixels expended in this incident were more than likely “much ado about nothing.”

    HMMM much ado about nothing , angry pixels,
    And how is this different from all the other manufactured
    incidents of faux rage that the wingnuts have concocted in the recent past. The disconnect from self awareness is astounding but not unexpected. the wingnut mantra of ” It’s not my fault” is still inviolate.

  14. 14
    DonkeyKong says:

    Fun stuff. Never retreat, never surrender.

    You forgot, never apologize for drooling on the carpet.

  15. 15

    This is really all John Cole’s fault, don’t you think?

    If he’d pointed out all these facts in the beginning, these guys would have been convinced and not have expended angry pixels unnecessarily.

  16. 16
    Tim F. says:

    I don’t think anybody has asked yet what ad rate Jamil Hussein would get.

  17. 17
    demimondian says:

    Sometimes I wonder if they realize they constantly use the standard excuses of abusive spouses.

    I would not be at all surprised to see a high authoritarianism index as a very strong signal of a predilection towards spousal abuse.

  18. 18
    chopper says:

    of course! because it’s the Times’s responsibility to prove wrong a bunch of people who think they’re guilty of treason, a crime punishable by death.

  19. 19
    jake says:

    In other words, all the attention came as a result of the New York Times not putting their standby pricing on their rate cards,

    And the difference between color and b/w ads and…sheesh.

    and the majority of the angry pixels expended in this incident were more than likely “much ado about nothing.”

    Translation: Most of us were wrong to get our panties in a knot but some of us had legitimate points and I’m not really sure we weren’t right to be angry…Look! Iran!

    Sorry, I find it really hard to believe people who act this stupid are able to operate a computer. Even the most user-friendly interface requires a certain amount of logic, a faculty these idiots seem to lack entirely.

  20. 20
    Perry Como says:

    I don’t think anybody has asked yet what ad rate Jamil Hussein would get.

    A 10% discount from the Beauchamp rate.

  21. 21
    yet another jeff says:

    I don’t think anybody has asked yet what ad rate Jamil Hussein would get.

    Probably two in the brain pan…front and back, so they don’t know whether he counts as a killing.

  22. 22
    Doug H. says:

    Even funnier, Owens is now deleting comments of those who point out his folly, and leaving the fawning ones praising him for his “good work.” A profile in courage and honesty.

    Now I know why he considers himself ‘Confederate’, he’s got Braxton Bragg written all over himself.

  23. 23
    TenguPhule says:

    Welcome to Wingnuttia. *Crazyworld*.

    Fixed.

    Somebody stop the planet, we need to kick some people off.

  24. 24
    Chris says:

    Even funnier, Owens is now deleting comments of those who point out his folly, and leaving the fawning ones praising him for his “good work.” A profile in courage and honesty.

    This has been standard practice for the Confederate Yanker for ages.

    When he proudly bragged about reporting one of the TNR soldiers for some bullshit accusation, I left a comment that said most people with two testicles were taught by their fathers not to be tattle tale snitches. Funnily enough, that comment got deleted. Twice. Sometimes the Truth hurts too much.

  25. 25
    John Cole says:

    This has been standard practice for the Confederate Yanker for ages.

    Anything that is mildly critical gets axed, and all that remains are overly sycophantic odes to his greatness, and a few mouthbreathers insisting the NY Times is still up to no good.

    I would call him a total fucking douchebag, but the fact of the matter is I can not believe he is that stupid. I have to believe he knows he is full of it, but recognizes that his revenue stream depends on the Malkin hits and the like. That is why a lot of the extremism and stupidity exists- it is financially lucrative.

  26. 26
    sglover says:

    But Dan Riehl most assuredly IS stupid. What’s to quibble about, the “motherfucker” bit?

  27. 27
    BIRDZILLA says:

    The NEW YORK SLIMES. ALL THE SLUDGE THATS FIT TO PRINT

  28. 28
    Al Whassizname says:

    Please see the Handbook for Spotting the Step-by-Step Destruction of Informed Democracy at http://kitsappundit.blogspot.c.....lican.html

  29. 29
    Chris says:

    Douchebag or not, fucking hilarious …

    http://lefarkins.blogspot.com/.....reaks.html

    the Confederate Yanker goes all cracker welfare queen, sponging a new grill off his readers.

    Be a man – buy your own damn grill.

  30. 30
  31. 31

    […] Confederate Yankee has been around for a while, but recently Bob Owens seems to have discovered a new niche for himself as a watchdog over the MSM. Already he has two notches on his belt: his expose of the TNR “fact-checking” coverup on their Beauchamp fables, and the NYT discount on the MoveOn ad, for which he drew a savage pushback from John Cole at Balloon Juice. In both cases it looks like Owens’ suspicions have been confirmed. […]

  32. 32
    evette says:

    Whoop, there it is. I’m out. Demo/Progresso/Lib amigos: I’m out. Ya’ll are totally filthy. Ya’ll are liars. Ya’ll are full of shit. I resisted the vrwc for at least a decade but now it is writ large. Sorry kids but we are all liar scum. They are right, we are wrong. Keep gobbling the lies of jerkoffs like Mr. Cole and jack off into obscurity. Here we go again: The NYT itself admitteded that they lied, cheated and, uh, “made a mistake” in the ad. Cole now is proven to be the hysteric liar he was called and, YES, he is 100% WRONG, we libs look like we are liars, the NYT bent over and YOU ARE THE IDIOT. Wake up……..I just did.

  33. 33
    Steve says:

    The NYT has admitted that they gave favored pricing to MoveOn and are now asking Moveon to pay the difference.

    Well? John? Well!

    That, my friends, is how the left-wing Cole driven blogosphere “investigates.” Create a charge, accuse someone of something, trumpet it wildly, get a bunch of mouthbreathers in a furor… And then discover you are wrong again as you demonstrate a complete lack understanding of the world around you.

    Come on little Johnny… What have you got to say for your wild ass speculation as to whether MoveOn got a ‘special’ price?

    John Cole is officially an ignorant idiot; you do not know and you cannot be told.

    ROFLMAO

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] Confederate Yankee has been around for a while, but recently Bob Owens seems to have discovered a new niche for himself as a watchdog over the MSM. Already he has two notches on his belt: his expose of the TNR “fact-checking” coverup on their Beauchamp fables, and the NYT discount on the MoveOn ad, for which he drew a savage pushback from John Cole at Balloon Juice. In both cases it looks like Owens’ suspicions have been confirmed. […]

Comments are closed.