I am sure most liberals would continue to say no.  But the fact is you can blithely dismiss this.  This is an industry that is profit driven, so the decision to give MoveOn.Org a sweetheart rate for the Petraeus Betray Us ad at the cost of $100 grand plus in lost revenue is significant.  Via Hot Air:

TIMES GIVES LEFTIES A HEFTY DISCOUNT FOR 'BETRAY US' AD

The New York Times dramatically slashed its normal rates for a full-page advertisement for MoveOn.org's ad questioning the integrity of Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq.

Headlined "Cooking the Books for the White House," the ad which ran in Monday's Times says Petraeus is "a military man constantly at war with the facts" and concluded - even before he testified before Congress - that "General Petraeus is likely to become General Betray Us."

According to Abbe Serphos, director of public relations for the Times, "the open rate for an ad of that size and type is $181,692."

A spokesman for MoveOn.org confirmed to The Post that the liberal activist group had paid only $65,000 for the ad - a reduction of more than $116,000 from the stated rate.

I can't pretend to act surprised.  And the bias is clear when you find out the pro war media watch was charged much more for their recent full page ad.

The defenders can claim that this is not unlawful, and they are right (as far as I know).

But the Newspaper is suppose to report the news, and outside its editorial pages it is supposed to do so impartially. So when you offer favored rates to one political cause, there is no way you can claim that is there?

So as I said, this just exposes and confirms what most of us knew already.  The NY Times has a liberal bias.

By the way, my Blog's ad space has a single rate structure, no matter the political leanings of the advertiser. 

Trackback URI | Comments RSS