News-Record.com

Yes, Kim, it was addressed in the N&R---in a blog! In the Editor's Blog. Just can't understand how people could miss it (sarcasm).

JR went on to "explain" how the N&R was trying to focus on local news and how he didn't think the memo was what the American people wanted to hear about. Said he thought folks were tired of all the talk of WMD and Bush (or something similar).

I think he should have published it in the newspaper and let people decide for themselves whether they wanted to read it or not. After all, it WAS big news. He just chose to be like half the newspapers in this country and treat it like stale news unworthy of being published. He had the opportunity to be separate from the crowd and he blew it, imo.

If this is not an example of the press choosing to reject something inflammatory about Bush, I don't know what is.

There's a difference in newsworthiness and value when you don't cover something as "news" but as commentary (sometimes supplied by readers). The N&R really hasn't covered the Downing Street Memo as news on the front page where other Iraq stories (the national kind) are published. This isn't merely a blogger's concern; you're part of the MSM and should tell us why you're not addressing it (like most of the rest of the MSM) in a mainstream place. I think that was the original writer's point. Can you please address that?

Kim, John Robinson has a very large problem which is a two-parter. One: he has to remain true to the right-wing of the party, he does after all work for a corp. The N&R has always in all of its names, manifestations, and long history been very "conservative". Two: This is where JR really dropped the ball - to wit: newspapers are, in this age of instant communications, anachronistic, passe, as they can at best print history. So you see when given the opportunity to print a relevant story that had become history - well he was torn between his loyalty to his masters' wishes and his role as journalist.
He has many excuses for this lapse in judgement, more excuses than a pregnant teenager, but the fact remains he did not print.

The N&R saved $34,000 by dropping the Times news, how much would they save by dropping JR. If the N&R isn't going to print the news they hardly need an editor. Hire a newly graduated commercial arts major - who would be more than qualified to arrange the Campbell Soup cents off coupons in a pleasing way , oh and the obits shouldn't be a problem, and that only leaves TV and theater, and of course letters to the editor. Hmmm..no editor...no letters. Oh well Rhino can take care of that.

"There's a difference in newsworthiness and value when you don't cover something as "news" but as commentary..."

Sue, how astute. I had not thought of it in that way but you are absolutely right. I was/am upset that JR picks and chooses "news" based on political allegiance. Since we are all affected by this ungodly war, we are entitled to know how we ended up in such a mess.

Not to change the subject but Kim, are you aware that the President of the United States is charged with protecting the country? That he is the Commander and Chief of our military and can direct them and task them with missions?

That ain't news.

The News and Record continues find room for Charles Davenport, George Will, Cal Thomas,... but can find little or no room for reporting of information available daily online. I agree with all of you about how this bias reflects and then influences local opinion, parochial at best, downright ignorant at worst.

"One: he has to remain true to the right-wing of the party, he does after all work for a corp. The N&R has always in all of its names, manifestations, and long history been very "conservative"

The idea that the News & Record is conservative is a bunch of bull. Did you see who the N&R recommended in the last elections? I think Kerry was right there at the top. Not only that, but just about every other major recommendation was a democrat.

Sorry, but I think if anything, this paper leans left.

Yellowcur, you're the only person I know who is actually more left than the N&R.
N&R true to the right wing?...what a load of hogwash.

The N&R should stick to local news, they're just regurgitating the left wing talking points in their national/world coverage.
I can turn on the TV and see real time news from the world and national forums, our newspaper only reports it the next day.

Ok Folks.

The truth is that the media is neither Left-Wing or Right-Wing. It is Corporate-Wing.

The news corporations are owned by someone. Those someones have political leanings. Whether or not they demand something be carried by the papers they own, the owned papers don't want to do anything to piss off their owners. It's a tightrope they walk- Report the news, as long as it's not too inflammatory.

The N&R has no problem reporting on local or state govt.

Corporatism is our enemy folks. Mussolini, the coiner of the word 'fascist' wrote once that fascism is the melding of the goverment and corporations for the corporations to fuel the goverment and the government to fuel the corporations. It makes perfect sense that our news outlets won't report news. If they did, they might lose favor with the tight-lipped Bush Cabal.

Having an opinion page on the "Downing Street Memo" is far from adequate. Our sons are fighting and dying in the streets of Iraq based on a lie told by the president of the United States. This isn't a matter of opinion--it is fact. The president LIED to the American people, created a public fraud, and 100,000 people have died as a result. This is inexcusable. This is a crime. To truly cover the "Downing Street Memo" is to demand the impeachment of the liar in the Oval Office immediately. There is no other rational response. When will the News and Record demand the obvious--the impeachment of a lying, murderous criminal who poses as president? What possible justification can you use to continue your support of this monster?

Mac,

Laying aside the fact that Iraq was not a country we needed protection from, the president takes an oath to protect the Constitution. Article I, section 8 states that Congress shall have the authority to declare war. We are a nation of laws, not men. Furtermore, I personally do not feel protected with our military stetched thin, our reserves doing year-long tours of duty, the billion dollar a week war cost swelling our deficit, and correspondingly our debt to countries like China, OBL on the run, the Taliban re-emerging, and strong-anti-American sentiment in increasingly more places of the world.