Political Punch

BA - so 100,000+ for color Please!

Also the NYT said th=at because they were not requested a certain day it was cheaper, but funny that it showed on the day Moveon wanted it to.

Please the NYT is in bed with Moveon which owns the new Democratic/Lib /socialist party.

Why can't the libs admit it! show some integrity. sorry i guess you need some to show it!

How very, very, very strange. I left a comment yesterday about this post, my comment appeared, but now it is missing! Why would that be? I will try once again to suggest an explanation for the disparity in price. I pointed out that the Freedom Watch ad incorporated color; the MoveOn was black and white. Hence, the difference in price.

GOd help us if any of the Libs win especially Obama or Edwards, at least Bill will keep Hilary in line.

Go Rudy and Thompson !!

Go Obama! I really hope he wins the 2008 election. He'll be a much better president than george bush

The NY Times is the only paper that has been losing subscribers the last 5 year ever quarter. I wonder why, maybe because they fall in the category off "liberal media lies"

Posted by: brian | Sep 13, 2007 11:18:45 AM

Brian, the Times is not the only newspaper to lose money, and subscribers. The Sarasota, Fl. Herald Tribune, which is owned by the Times, has seen its bottom line shrink. (Boo hoo, it breaks my heart). They have had to cut features, shrink the paper and lay off employees. Needless to say it is a liberal, left leaning publication just like its parent.

The radical liberal left has struck again. So what is new? It isn't the first nor the last time this will occur. The Conservatives and Middle of the Roader's must continue to be ever vigilant against their diatribes and anti-Americanism.

Discount? 'Natch.

Conservatives don't need a discount, they can run radio talk show with out going bankrupt or public funding.

You Liberals antiquate your selves with some really funky people...Too funny

Has anyone looked to see if conservative-leaning newspapers give discounts ad rates to conservative-leaning groups?

The Times could not be fair on anything. Don;t you know who runs the paper????

Why do we expect anything resembling equality from the New York Times? We should be used to their usual extremely liberal lying. Good luck to Rudy trying to get an ad at the same rate as the move on mob.

Discount?

Just think Hilary, Obama, Edwards and the rest are puppets of MoveOn..... back stabing a high ranking officer that has served our country with hte highest honor.....Traitors... and who knows General Patraeus might be a democrate...

You are blinded by misguided patriotism, just as your leader is.

BLOODY-BUSH - I guess you say Patriots of Al-Qeada should get discounts, since they definately are not supporters of America, see the General they libeled and insulted is a True American Patriot Hero.

But this is the paper that tells our enemy military secrets.

What are you libs going to do if these Islamic Terrorists win, since you are the ones they hate the most due to the immorality of the libs.

I guess this is ok with the dems and libs. Where is the investigation? Where is the outrage? Oh, i see, i understand. this cant be true, only repubs lie!

Jordan - a 100,000$ difference, What a bunch horse manuer. Why don't the NYT just state they will print the news as the Libs seem fit to print!!

All the paper shows is that it is a Left Wing propaganda tool.

Boycott The NYT!!!

Of course the conservative group had a higher rate. They advertised in the NEW YORK Times on SEPTEMBER 11. Obviously getting a full page ad on September 11th in a paper based in New York City is going to cost more than whenever Moveon got theirs. Doh.

Of course we know who the democrats are in the pocket of.

gopspinster, We love to talk about the war because we can hold our heads high and with honor unlike the cut and run gang that you run with. If you thumped us in 2006 than I guess the GOP just kicked your little butt in 2000 and 2004. What will be the dems campain slogan in 2008 uh We could have surrendered before we won? Oh yea the NYT got their hand caught in the cookie jar on this one.

Who cares... This is capitalism at it's finest.

If some liberal group advertises on faux news, they deserve to pay what ever the bill is.

Falls under supply and demand. If you are willing to pay the bill, then the price is right.

NYT is a commie rag.....

The Media plays a MAJOR role in swaying public opinion... The MEDIA’s charge to run political advertisements should be shown on the ad, and if they are given a discount, that discount needs to be shown, that includes all ads run on TV and Radio… Our FOURTH arm of Government needs to let us know WHO they are supporting...

REAL Patriots SHOULD receive a discount... I see no problem here.

Just a discount based on volume… YA Right…it’s your story…… All political ads should be charged @ the SAME price for ALL political organizations and the candidates... by giving them a discount... as far as I'm concerned, the NY Times is endorsing that ad or candidate – Couldn’t this be consider a "DONATION" to Move-On.... The Federal Election Commission needs to look at this…

Bush has given Osama Bin Laden all he wanted: 1) The U.S. military bogged down in an Islamic nation, by starting a war of choice in Iraq, fomenting more Islamic radicalism 2) Most U.S. forces out of the Islamic holy land, Saudi Arabia 3) A massive drain on the U.S. treasury 4) A whole new generation of radial Islamists and terrorists 5) Oil at over $75 per barrel ($80 yesterday) 6) Bin Laden's personal freedom when Bush turned away from Afghanistan, and his administration routinely dismissing Bin Laden, the murderer of 3,000 Americans, as insignificant.

Petraeus is just a Bush sycophant, and by extension a lackey of Big Oil, like Bush himself.

This is an unbelievable attempt to try and wag the dog again. The issue is THE WAR STUPID! That is the last thing any Republican wants to talk about and the first thing they SHOULD be talking about. Keep it up and 2008 will be twice as big of a "thumping" than 2006.

As an ex-display advertising sales person, let me tell you that the publisher usually gives the sales person the freedom to get the best price you can but hardly anybody pays the Rate Card. The amount of discount depends on how much unsold space you have in that particular edition and how good a negotiator the Media Buyer is.

With how lame a job Ari Fleisher did as White House spokesman, I wouldn't be surprised if he got suckered on rates.

In other news Jack Tapper
edits his blog when people
compare him to a tabloid journalist....
Way to fight for freedom of the press
and speech Jack. I commend you...

It's not at all unusual for newspapers to sell ad space at the last minute and give a discount to the buyer, especially if that space wasn't sold already. The rationale is that it's better to have sold column space for some money than have to fill it otherwise and make no money.

However, if the "Newspaper of Record" is discounting its ads for favored political advertisers, then it should tell its readers who those advertisers are so the readers will be aware of conflicts of interest. After all, if an auto magazine is beholden to GM for the bulk of its advertising, then it deserves to be scrutinized carefully when it gives glowing reviews to a Buick.

The Therapist - NYT did give a 100,000 discount, the new reported yesterday, that size ad normally costs 162,000, but NYT charge only 62,000. So is the NYT going to give discounts to Support America Groups? I say Not, but hey time will tell.

C'mon folks, both sides spew garbage. I hate when one side's panties get all bunched up over the other's "media" stance. C'mon, be adults. Your party isn't pooping roses either.

Here's what I would do, you know?

Instead of running this story as a "conservatives say . . ." piece, why don't you do a little flat-footed journalistic work and find out if the NYT is giving nepotism discounts to MoveOn? Then YOU could be the source. I mean if it's all hubris, then I'm ssure you'd be willing to point that out.

-T

Yes they are one of the Democrats/Libs Arms, they spew garbage, put American lives in danger and are traitors.

What I do not understand they laid thousands, they cut the size of the paper, because of the lost of subscribers, Do any libs ever see a solution, maybe if they printed the truth, they would be making money.

Both sides lie, its just funny how we need to label ourselves to feel apart of something. I vote on issues not party trends, but hay that's just me. I know, I'm alone on my feelings.

The NY Times is the only paper that has been losing subscribers the last 5 year ever quarter. I wonder why, maybe because they fall in the category off "liberal media lies"

whats new