From the comments:
Kinda swamped the next two days, so hopefully Tim can pick up the slack till Wednesday.
Hopefully this whole NY Times mess is forgotten by then…
You saw through my scheme! Months ago, when I was scheduling a bunch of work-related things for this for this time period, I was merely planning in advance to dodge the tough questions! Last week, when I posted nothing but open threads with a few quick posts and noted I have a lot on my plate at the moment, it was just part of the dodge!
You are on to me! Seriously, folks- in the half decade this blog has been in operation, I don’t think I have ever avoided a fight or an opportunity to tell people to go fuck themselves (although as of late, I am a little hesistant telling that to our friends on the right, as I am afraid they will misinterpret me and end up in an airport bathroom with a congressional page). I see via the referral logs that the dead-enders at Red State and a certain stay-at-home dad are sending catcalls ourway, so I will make this brief. According to the NY Times, two things:
1.) The Public Editor seems to think the NY Times violated their internal policy about what is and is not appropriate to publish. I could care less about that, as it truly is an internal issue. I would recomend a policy that prints whatever (including pictures of aborted fetuses, Swift Boat ads, etc.) and letting the readers sort it out, but I don’t set the NY Times policy.
2.) The grievous “mistake” the Times is admitting to is that they were insufficiently careful in stating that “yes,” the ad would run on the date in question because there was space available, but that they were not guaranteeing it- at least that is how I am interpreting the following:
Eli Pariser, the executive director of MoveOn.org, told me that his group called The Times on the Friday before Petraeus’s appearance on Capitol Hill and asked for a rush ad in Monday’s paper. He said The Times called back and “told us there was room Monday, and it would cost $65,000.” Pariser said there was no discussion about a standby rate. “We paid this rate before, so we recognized it,” he said. Advertisers who get standby rates aren’t guaranteed what day their ad will appear, only that it will be in the paper within seven days.
Catherine Mathis, vice president of corporate communications for The Times, said, “We made a mistake.” She said the advertising representative failed to make it clear that for that rate The Times could not guarantee the Monday placement but left MoveOn.org with the understanding that the ad would run then. She added, “That was contrary to our policies.”
Pretty thin gruel.
Now, if the NY Times did secretly guarantee it, while charging them the standby rate, then that is a different matter altogether, and to hell with them- they are lying and can rot. Otherwise, it seems to me that with what has been disclosed so far there is not much there, there.
At any rate, there it is. I have addressed this pressing issue, and am glad to contribute to furthering the growth of MoveOn (sending in more money was a master stroke by Pariser- it will guarantee a few days more coverage and they can now pressure Giuliani to pay more, thus keeping the story alive for a few more days. Not a bad 70k spent considering they have taken in over a half a million since the ad originally appeared) and dodging the actual substance of the sketchy Petraeus testimony.
For future reference, I will be busy for the next few days. Thus, I will be unable to blog about the Jena 6, Ahjminialphabets trip to Columbia and the UN, whether OJ is guilty, our new plan to win hearts and minds with snipers, and whatever else is going on that requires my not-so-urgent attention. Again, hopefully Tim will pick up the slack.
PS- We are up to 3798 dead, who knows how many injured, and just threw another 50 billion into operations. Have we won yet?