Editorial page editor Cynthia Tucker of the Atlanta Journal Constitution was asked why letters that are "factually inaccurate" are allowed into the newspaper. I had long assumed it was the same reason stories that are factually inaccurate are used in the newspaper, but not-so says Tucker: "We live in such a politically polarized age that not everybody agrees on the facts. My letters policy tends to be a bit looser than those of some other editorial page editors."
This includes "Readers who still believe Iraq had weapons of mass destruction that they were taking to Syria are allowed to express that view even though it is clearly not true." As you may recall, I addressed this "inaccuracy" once before for ACLU president turned journalist, Robyn Blumner.
But Cynthia does have a standard that even she won't breach: "If a letter is so distorted it needs an editor's note, Tucker won't run it. She worries that adding an editor's note would embarrass the writer." Cynthia, consider this my editor's note to you.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
The gracious Ms. Tucker
August 6, 2007 - 23:46 ET by nkviking75How very generous of you, Ms. Tucker, to actually allow a letter writer to vary from the accepted liberal line. As one of the MSM's many Arbiters of All That's True and Right, this is an exceptionally gracious stand for you to take. I, a lowly conservative, grovel at your feet.
Not.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
I guess I am just dense.
August 6, 2007 - 23:51 ET by RESTLESS 1I guess I am just dense. The media continues to spread the rhetoric that we went to Iraq solely for wmd. I seem to remember 14 or so U.N. resolutions completely ignored be Hussein, weapons inspectors being obstructed, kicked out of Iraq, or simply not let into Iraq, and the failure of Hussein to prove he had put a halt to his nuclear and biological weapons research. If he had let the inspectors do their jobs and given the U.N. what it asked for in those resolutions, this war quite probably would have never happened. But do the media put the blame where it belongs???? NOOOOO!!! They blame our President. The countries whining the most about Iraq and wmd (France, Germany, et al) all of a sudden started backing off when the shit hit the fan. Now the media here and abroad have taken the anti-war sentiment and run with it in a way that as far as the American media concerned, should be treated as treasonous.
All of these things are conveniently forgotten about in the reports and articles written in our "wonderful" press, and somehow, those of us that remember what the war and the wmd are all about are the "confused" ones. Yeah right.
Let's also not forget that
August 7, 2007 - 00:29 ET by KJ_sezLet's also not forget that we had a cease fire agreement with Iraq - not a peace treaty - after the first Gulf war. Said cease fire was violated by Saddam numerous times, and any single violation of the terms of the agreement was more than enough justification to resume hostilities (including Bill Clinton's legally and morally justifiable yet ineffectual tit-for-tat bombing missions).
Putting the discussion in that context makes just so much of the "unjust war" or "where are the WMD's?" theories.
I agree completely. Thanks
August 7, 2007 - 00:36 ET by RESTLESS 1I agree completely. Thanks for reminding me. Going into Iraq was as you stated a resumption of hostilities. Iraq had fired on our aircraft numerous times and that was all of the justification we needed. What still angers me is that all of the whiners in the U.N. were pissing and moaning about Saddam and wmd, but they lacked the will to stand up to him. When you think about all of the smaller countries, sending what they could to help, you realize just what blather countries like France, Germany, and Russia were.
Saddam
August 7, 2007 - 08:58 ET by mytwocentsI seem to remember that little detail about 'Oil for Food' that was lining the pockets of some UN officials.
Cease fire
August 7, 2007 - 11:10 ET by pbanks7I once counted about 25 times in one month, (it was a January, can't remember the year)in which Iraq either painted radar on our planes or fired at them. They all ended with missiles being plastered into Iraqi assets.
Ignorance is bliss. It's easier to repeat a mindless slogan than to do some actual research.
Where is a link for those
August 7, 2007 - 03:30 ET by Dan The Man 2Where is a link for those 16 resolutions, I have been looking for them
Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.
Dan, I found this one. And
August 7, 2007 - 08:15 ET by RESTLESS 1Dan, I found this one. And here is another link, but it has more than the Security Council resolutions. Gotta run to work now. Be back later.
Tall tails
August 7, 2007 - 09:07 ET by general companyCynthia Tucker of the Atlanta Journal Constitution was asked why letters that are "factually inaccurate" are allowed into the newspaper.
Any answer other then "the (untruths) are not allowed" is as ridiculous as continuing to sell news under the guise of it being anything other then fiction.
BTW Cindy, here's your WMD's http://www.insightmag.com/Media/MediaManager/wmd_0.htm
Good lord
August 7, 2007 - 11:08 ET by EmmyjuneI have lived in the Atlanta area all my life. The only reason I EVER pick up the liberal-a$$ fish wrap that is the AJC is to educate myself on the level of idiocy the other side possesses. Cynthia Tucker is a raging moron, and apparently holds no concern for her own credibility as an editor and journalist.
Cindy
August 7, 2007 - 10:38 ET by Tim GrahamI would argue Tucker's being generous to conservatives here (since she's not one), and suggesting that she allows some conservative letters in, even though she thinks they're full of beans.
Tim,It is funny, that
August 7, 2007 - 11:46 ET by Chris NormanTim,
It is funny, that the "inaccuracy" she cited as an example was from a conservative perspective. She didn't say, for instance, that a letter could say, maybe, "Bush had the New Orlean's levees dynamited". I've seen a lot more views expressed in the media like the latter, rather than the former.
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
The Al Jazeera Urinal-Constipation
August 7, 2007 - 13:39 ET by Dave RWell, Cythia, that's mighty "white" of you for allowing the fact that WMD's were actually in Iraq and that many of them went to Syria, to appear in the letters section of my hometown newsrag. A rag most people here, including me, stopped reading well over ten years ago, mostly because of you, Ms. Tucker.
Frankly, I wouldn't allow my dog to relieve himself upon that newspaper.
Help Fred defeat everybody.
Dave R and
August 7, 2007 - 14:40 ET by JerDave R and Emmyjune...
Maybe you should take another look at the editorial perspective of the AJC. Cynthia Tucker is indeed a liberal and the lead editorials generally reflect a liberal viewpoint.
On the other hand, associate editor Jim Wooten is a solid conservative whose opinion pieces are published three times a week. Additionally, with respect to the recurring syndicated columnists, conservatives have the edge. [Will, Krauthammer, and Brooks vs. Friedman and Pitts] A full range of views from across the political spectrum are offered on the opinion pages by guest columnists . Letters to the editor are fairly even, but my guess is that more conservative than liberal ones are published.
Pretty fair and balanced for a "raging moron" liberal editor.
Jer
AJC---misterbill
August 7, 2007 - 14:57 ET by misterbillMoved to Atlanta in'96. Subscribed to AJC within two weeks. After reading Tucker for about 4 weeks I told my wife that Tucker was a racist of the first order and one very liberal, liberal. I stopped reading her column, I disagreed with her so strongly. Mike King is an ardent open border editor, as liberal as they come.
The AJC discontinued O'Reilly (didn;t particularly like his columns). And after the first year, I cannot remember any more columns by Mona Charen. They occasionally will publish an article from National Review. All the aforesaid adds up to an extremely liberal newspaper. Quick to print anything that denounces or criticizes Bush--Oh yes- they do pubish Ann Coulter occasionally, but only when they feel her article is easy pickings for liberals.
The Marietta Journal is a smaller, but more balanced newpaper. They publish Bill Press regularly. He leans so far left that he is lying on his side.
If the Marietta paper had the AJC sports coulumn, I would cancel the AJC.
misterbill... Yes,
August 7, 2007 - 16:09 ET by Jermisterbill...
Yes, O'Reilly was discontinued by the AJC (as have been liberal columnists E.J. Dionne and Richard Cohen) and replaced by the even more conservative Charles Krauthammer.
I checked the web site for the Marietta Daily Journal. The lead editorial was "The Left is still not serious about national security"...there was an opinion column by conservative Bill Shipp...another one by conservative Cal Thomas...another one by conservative Tony Blankley...a cartoon showing the leading Democratic candidates waving white surrender flags, and a second cartoon of a Democrat holding a white flag while being flattened by an Abrams tank. I realize this may warm most of the hearts here on NewsBusters, but you were saying something about "balance". Huh?
Jer,
August 8, 2007 - 12:26 ET by Dave RI agree about Jim Wooten, as I think he does an excellent job,but the editorial pages of the AJC is the only place contrary info shows up.
Help Fred defeat everybody.
Dave R... I believe that
August 8, 2007 - 15:06 ET by JerDave R...
I believe that "news management" does exist to a degree and is certainly regrettable. But we all view things filtered through our personal ideological prisms and what may appear as totally objective reporting to one may be viewed as irresponsibly biased by another.
Anyway...been a fellow Atlantan for over thirty years. We obviously have some political differences, but I promise to be "friendly". (Discretion being the better part of valor and all of that.)
Later, Jer
Jer,
August 8, 2007 - 21:50 ET by Dave RIts okay, as my being a libertarian puts me in the oddball camp most of the time, anyway.
You know, sometimes that can be a lot of fun.
-Psst, I used to work with Tom Teepen's daughter.
-And I'd take him over Cynthia T. any day of the week.
Help Fred defeat everybody.
I hear you Dave... But
August 9, 2007 - 00:01 ET by JerI hear you Dave...
But the difference is, they would still save a seat for you at the dinner table, while I would be somewhere on the menu as "Roasted Liberal".
I wish Teepen was still around. Loved his writing style...feisty as hell...farther "left" than me!
Jer
marietta daily
August 8, 2007 - 15:21 ET by misterbillCheck today---two(2) bill shipp columns--a local news front page. The opinion pages talk about progress in Iraq. Is progress in Iraq a conservative vs liberal subject?
My point, and I make it again is that Tucker is a flaming racist, liberal and they don't have one of those on the MDJ.
Misterbill: I'll try to
August 8, 2007 - 17:09 ET by JerMisterbill:
I'll try to break it to you gently...Bill Shipp is a conservative, as is Michael Barone and as is Delroy Murdock, both of whom also appear in today's edition. In fact, so far this week not one single liberal has graced the editorial pages of the Marietta Daily Journal. I'll eagerly await the liberal pundit deluge over the next few days to provide the balance you were touting.
Progress in Iraq? I certainly hope so. But inasmuch as a constant Republican talking point has been that Democrats are rooting for a U.S. defeat, my guess is that the editorial was indeed expressing a conservative viewpoint. But I promise to read it before passing final judgment.
To smear Cynthia Tucker as a "flaming racist" is really unfair and so very, very wrong. She is a liberal--no mystery there, and I haven't agreed with all of her positions on racial and social issues. But she has taken on the black community a number of times, and has been a vigorous critic of the King family as well as of former mayor Bill Campbell, both during his administration and afterwards. I truly hope you'll reconsider your characterization of her.
Jer