News-Record.com

Funny how the N&R ran two days worth of pictures and articles against the war, when in fact the pro war activist were the larger and more vocal group. why as an editor did you not cover these people. liberal bias again in the N&R? Arent you the one responsible for the coverage or in this case the lack of, your responsibility?

Sorry, frank, but after scanning newspaper coverage from throughout the country, I've seen no evidence that the pro-war activists were the larger or more vocal group. We did not ignore the war support, either, and included a photo of supporters on the front page yesterday.

Do a Google search, Mr. Robinson. The Gathering of Eagles to protect national monuments from anti-US and anti-war protesters outnumbered the protesters by 3:1. Estimates are 30,000 Eagles and 5-10,000 protesters.
The Eagles action was a resounding success largely ignored by the liberal press because it doesn't further their agenda. I expected nothing less than the liberal status quo from the N&R and that's what you gave us.
I don't know how to link articles on here so I'll let you do the leg work.

Go back to Sunday's paper, jaycee. The front page story presents both pro-war and anti-war demonstrations. The headline reads: Protesters march against Iraq war. The largest event, in Washington, sees a sizable group of counterdemonstrators. Don't forget the front page photo of war supporters on Monday.

I wouldn't call that "largely ignored." If I'm pushing that liberal agenda you constantly accuse me of, I'm doing a pretty lousy job.

"If I'm pushing that liberal agenda you constantly accuse me of, I'm doing a pretty lousy job."

I never said you were good at it. :)

John -

Good Grief !

After you finish scanning newspapers from throughout the country for evidence of pro-war activities how about spending the rest of the day going into Greensboro barber shops - ask every barber if you need a haircut. How about letting us know how your scanning of barbers works out.

So, pro war people get a picture, and two sentences. When the anti war people get numerous pages of coverage, and articles and numerous pictures....hmmm looks a little fishy to me.

Frank, your comment says to me that you aren't reading our paper. At least what you described doesn't remotely describe our coverage.

Holden, I know that some people believe that all newspapers walk in lockstep on this issue, but it's not true. I also happen to have higher regard for barbers than you do. I believe some would say, no, you don't need one.

Frank:

Good luck finding "numerous pages" of coverage of anything in our paper. Or any other.

C'mon guys.....it wasn't like they were covering a potential hate crime at Guilford College or something!

Let's cut a little slack here......

Mr. Robinson, I will give you a break, after I saw your front page, I left the NR on the rack, and saved my 50 cent. Since I only buy your paper on M,W and F,you lost 33% of my money. Killian if you think your paper does not do pages and pages on anything, look at your lte. They all the same, Bush bad, ( not that I am Bush fan)democrats good. Killian tell us when the last time the NR had a letter (bad) about your good ole boys in Raleigh??

Mr. Johnson, we publish all the "Bush good, Democrats bad" letters on T, Th and S. :)

Mr. Robinson, I was unaware that newspapers such as the N&R scanned "newspaper coverage from throughout the country" as a means to procure the facts about a particular item. After all, if it's in the LA Times, Wash Post or NY Times, it must be gospel, right? Wouldn't want to, you know, actually investigate a story, would we? Thanks for the clarification.

Mike, the investigation was actually done. We wrote about the local "peace" activity at the Congregational United Church of Christ. I don't believe there were pro-war demonstrators there.

The reference to other newspapers was simply to indicate that if we were ignoring a particular story as was suggested, then many, many other papers were, too.

Clearly, the N&R edited out pro-TROOP (not war) text from the AP story that I read in the Washington Post Sunday(see my letter to editor,hope you guys print it). The fact that you call us pro-war tells what your mindset is....do you call anti-war protestors, pro-terrorist activists?

We all know that you 60's leberals are hoping to have another peace, love, and drugs movement. Sorry, we're not going to let you spit on our troops, again!

Clearly, we did not edit out the pro-troop text. Are we talking about the same newspaper? (I used the term "pro-war" only because Frank used it in his comment.)

That you would call me a 60s "leberal" is amusing, particularly as you don't know me.