NY Times Rejects McCain Op Ed
Tommy Christopher
Contributor
Posted:
07/21/08
The New York Times has rejected an Op Ed submitted by Senator John McCain, on the heels of the paper's publication of Senator Obama's "Plan For Iraq." The episode has sparked outraged cries of media bias from 
Republicans, but the Times says it is a content-based decision. From Drudge:
The Times is certainly within its rights to refuse the Op Ed piece, and it is being consistent with past practices. In February, The Times rejected an Op Ed by the Clinton campaign, as well.
I opposed that move at the time, because the Clinton letter contained offers of fact that disputed a story The Times had done. Their editorial policy, however, appears to be consistent and nonpartisan, in this case.
Republicans, but the Times says it is a content-based decision. From Drudge: In McCain's submission to the TIMES, he writes of Obama: 'I am dismayed that he never talks about winning the war-only of ending it... if we don't win the war, our enemies will. A triumph for the terrorists would be a disaster for us. That is something I will not allow to happen as president.'Given the Times' rocky relationship with McCain, you would think they would want to be on rock-solid ground for something like this. I believe they are.
'The Obama piece worked for me because it offered new information (it appeared before his speech); while Senator Obama discussed Senator McCain, he also went into detail about his own plans.'
Shipley continues: 'It would be terrific to have an article from Senator McCain that mirrors Senator Obama's piece. To that end, the article would have to articulate, in concrete terms, how Senator McCain defines victory in Iraq.'
| Yes, they were within their rights and their editorial policy. | |
|---|---|
| No, the move reflects an anti-McCain bias. |
The Times is certainly within its rights to refuse the Op Ed piece, and it is being consistent with past practices. In February, The Times rejected an Op Ed by the Clinton campaign, as well.
I opposed that move at the time, because the Clinton letter contained offers of fact that disputed a story The Times had done. Their editorial policy, however, appears to be consistent and nonpartisan, in this case.